Corporate Journalism: When Marketing and Media Collide May 6, 2009
Posted by magnostic in CMO, Content, Corporate journalism, Journalism, Journalists, Marketing, PR.7 comments
I spoke last night at a CMO Club dinner in Boston on the topic of Corporate Journalism. (Many thanks to Pete Krainik for the opportunity.) I’ve written about some of this before, but here’s the gist of what I talked about:
In early 2002, I was working at McKinsey in a newly formed internal communications group called Knowledge Services. The group formed to develop new methods to capture the intellectual capital the consultants were creating through their client work.
Our first task was cleaning up an internal document repository called PDNet, which contained more than 11,000 documents, most of them PowerPoint decks that were relevant only to the people who wrote them. The problem? The documents had no context, just a bunch of bullet points and factoids. Without the consultant to provide the story around the slides, their usefulness to anyone beyond the authors was limited.
Our group was asked to audit those documents, weed out the outdated, irrelevant and redundant ones, and add context to the rest.
For the latter task, we came up with a basic approach: get the authors on the phone, get them to talk through the slides, and ask them a few questions to fill in any holes. We then transcribed the conversations, edited them, and appended the text to the slides. Instant context. The documents were now much more valuable to new associates coming on board, or anyone else who needed to get up to speed quickly on a topic.
An interesting thing happened during these calls. The consultants we interviewed about documents they wrote 3 or 4 or 5 years ago would often respond, “I’m happy to talk to you about this document, but what we should really be talking about is the current work I’m doing with X client.” We had tapped into a vein of intellectual capital that hadn’t been mined – it was bouncing around inside the consultant’s heads or on their hard drives, and they hadn’t had time to develop it further to make it sharable.
This led us to create a new service line: creating articles and white papers that the consultants could share directly with clients or pitch to external publications. It was basically the same process as described above: We would interview the consultants, have them walk through whatever supporting PowerPoint deck they had cobbled together, ask a few clarifying questions, do some additional research, and deliver back to them a first draft of a paper.
The consultants loved it, because the process was easy for them – spend an hour on the phone with an editor, then review/revise two or three drafts until the paper was client-ready. It was a very efficient way to capture and share the firm’s learnings and enhance McKinsey’s already impressive thought leadership on key topics.
This was the beginning of what I and former colleague David Churbuck dubbed “corporate journalism.” We didn’t invent the phrase, but we glommed onto it as a way to explain to people how our approach was different from traditional mar-comm.
(The phrase may have been coined in a book called “Beyond Spin: The Power of Strategic Corporate Journalism,” by Markos Kounalakis, Drew Banks and Kim Daus in (2000). More recently, consultant David Meerman Scott applied many of the principles of corporate journalism in his book, “The New Rules of Marketing and PR,” which talks about new methods for marketers who now have the power of digital media to communicate directly with their target audience.
In a broad sense, “corporate journalism” means applying journalism skills –writing, editing, objectivity, interviewing, research, and a good bullshit detector – to marketing communications.
Corporate journalism is an effective method for uncovering hidden pockets of knowledge within your organization. It can be used to capture the expertise of your subject matter experts – from the CEO down to the front-line worker – and publish that information in ways that better position your company as a trusted resource in your market or industry.
There are three main benefits to this approach.
1. Influence – aka thought leadership. By tapping into the knowledge across your entire organization (not just from your executives), you can develop fresh insights about your company, your products, your customers, and the industry you serve. You can then package this information in a way that establishes you as an expert in your market space.
2. Credibility. The concept of corporate journalism also means unleashing journalists inside your company to ferret out the trouble spots. In this time of transparency and authenticity, corporate journalism means presenting the bad with the good. Otherwise people will just view it as more spin.
I’m not talking necessarily about taking all of this information public, but you’d be well served to uncover pockets of discontent among employees or customers before someone else blogs or tweets about it.
Being open and honest in your communications will build trust among your customers or prospects.
3. Reach. If you create content that is authentic and believable, and you openly share that content with your community, good things will happen:
- Others will link to it.
- They will comment on it.
- They will share it with friends or colleagues.
As a result, your sphere of influence will expand. Your website will become a destination. You can actually host a conversation instead of (or in addition to) chasing it around the blogosphere.
You will give customers, prospects, or any other constituent a reason to come to your site, and a reason to return.
What makes for compelling content?
There’s no real rocket science here. It has to be:
- Informative
- Timely
- Relevant
- Accessible
For all of your target groups.
The accessibility piece is key, and often overlooked. It’s often hard to find useful information on a corporate website. That’s why more marketers need to treat their corporate site as a living, breathing media site – lead with your best/most timely content, offer user-oriented navigation, and make it all searchable, sharable, and ratable.
What kind of content can you create?
The good thing about capturing the insights of employees and executives across your company is that it can be packaged and distributed in many ways. In the early days of digital media we called it “skinning the pig” – how many ways can you package a single source of content? For example, from one on-camera interview with a subject matter expert, you can create a video or podcast that can be published on your site. You can also use the transcripts as the basis for:
- Q&A’s
- White papers
- Website copy
- Articles for external placement
You can then promote and link to those assets via:
- Blog posts
- Twitter tweets
- Facebook groups
- Social networks specific to your industry
That’s a pretty broad set of assets from a single source of content. And it’s a much better approach than sending out press releases and hoping that someone writes a story about you. (A quick aside – journalists generally don’t read press releases – and just because the search engines pick them up doesn’t mean anyone else reads them either.)
This combination of corporate journalism and social media can be a powerful platform for exchanging ideas and information, across your company (internally) and outside your organization and with partners, suppliers, customers.
Corporate Journalism in Practice
I just wrapped up an engagement with Manpower, the global employment services agency. Their corporate website is about as pedestrian as it gets – lots of traditional marketing copy, some press releases, a few white papers or research reports. Nothing inherently current, and nothing remotely compelling to the thousands of temps and contract workers that the company places with clients.
Manpower’s business is fueled by corporate clients who hire Manpower to fill gaps in its workforce, either temporarily or full time; relationships with the individual workers are mostly transactional (give us your resume, we’ll match you with an employee). But the company decided it needed a better connection to these job candidates. Two years ago, it commissioned a new web property that would serve as a career management resource for professionals, specifically those in IT, engineering and finance – a key focus for future business growth.
I was brought in as part of a team of consultants with Truman Company to help Manpower develop the content strategy for the new site.
Our first step was to audit their existing content. We asked the marketing team for their content; they gave us white papers and press releases. They weren’t thinking about content the same way as we did – so we cast a wider net to gather any material that drove their business – executive presentations, the reference guides given to job candidates at local branches, sales support materials, and so on. They had a boatload of useful information about interviewing skills, resume preparation, local job markets, workplace diversity issues, etc., but they had never published most of this material anywhere electronically.
The next step was to re-cast this content and make it Web-ready and suitable for the target audience.
Next, we recruited a group of internal subject matter experts – career counselers, diversity experts, HR professionals – to blog for the new site.
We also filmed corporate executives on the topic of career management, and posted the videos on the site.
We also conducted formal and informal interviews with a broad range of internal stakeholders to identify the top-of-mind issues from their dealings with clients and job candidates – and turned those insights into articles or online discussion forum topics.
The site, called MyPath, is currently in public beta. There are still plenty of kinks to work out, but this site represents a HUGE cultural shift for Manpower. They are embracing the concept of engaging directly with a core target audience. They are attempting to shift their business model on the fly to serve them well into the future. And they’re doing it by embracing the fact that they’re now a media company that can create compelling content to engage directly with the people who use their services.
The last example comes from the public sector and is referenced here.
Any marketer can learn from these examples. There’s inherent value in talking with your constituents – be they internal employees or external customers or prospects – to find out what they really think about a topic, an issue, a brand, a strategy.
It’s not easy. It often requires a culture change – specifically, how introspective are you willing to be? How much of the onion are you willing to peel back to find out how people really feel about your company and its products or services? And how much of that knowledge are you willing to openly share with your constituents?
Corporate journalism is a great way to:
- take the pulse of your target audience,
- develop insights that can be packaged and served back to the community,
- engage and build credibility with the customers and prospects who will help your business grow well into the future.
The good news: There’s no shortage of out-of-work (or soon to be unemployed) journalists who have the skills to assist any marketer heading down this path.
Additions to the Blogroll Feb 19, 2009
Posted by magnostic in Blogs, Journalism, Journalists.add a comment
Two former colleagues are now newly independent and blogging: John Dodge, my former news boss at PC Week, and Abbie Lundberg, who I worked with at CXO Media. Both are highly respected in the tech publishing industry (and by me). John is a longtime journalist and the former editor in chief of Design News. Abbie is a longtime journalist and the former editor in chief of CIO magazine. I sense a trend here.
The Future of Journalism Dec 23, 2008
Posted by magnostic in Editorial, Journalism, Journalists, Magazines, Media, New Media, Publishing, User Generated content, Web 2.0.1 comment so far
Great piece from Nieman Reports by BusinessWeek editor John Byrne titled “The changing truths of journalism.” He talks about how context is as important as the content itself and explains why publishers need to become “editorial curators” – sifting through and organizing articles (regardless of the source) and serving them back to communities of readers. Skip the first few grafs and get into the meat of how magazines and newspapers need to evolve in order to survive – as evidenced by BusinessWeek’s recent launch of Business Exchange, a series of online microcommunities organized (by readers) around vertical topics. Worth the read.
Corporate Journalism in the Public Sector Dec 9, 2008
Posted by magnostic in Corporate journalism, Customer Engagement, Innovation, Journalism, Journalists, Marketing.add a comment
I’ve written from time to time about corporate journalism – the practice of applying traditional journalistic skills (investigating, interviewing, writing, editing) to create more authentic marketing communications, either for internal or external use. There are many flavors of corporate journalism; it can even be found in the in the public sector.
Last week the NY Times reported on a town in Vermont called Starksboro, whose leaders were looking to find a better way to get input from residents on upcoming revisions to the town plan. Most towns convene a series of planning committee meetings that at best a handful of residents attend (usually to complain about something). Starksboro took a different tack: it commissioned students at nearby Middlebury College to interview residents about their vision for the town’s future.
The concept is simple: talk to people about what they do and what they care about, transcribe the interviews, and look for common themes. From the article:
“The key is to project beyond immediate controversies over applications for subdivisions and to say, ‘Let’s envision the future that we would love to have,’ ” said Prof. John Elder of Middlebury, “at which point there is considerable agreement.”
The students … have spent the semester attending town dinners, exploring farms and forest, and visiting dozens of homes.
The objective in Starksboro is to develop a much more accurate picture of the community:
In their work, the students have seen certain themes emerge: Starksboro residents raise their children to leave. Few go to town meetings or interact with people outside their own sections of town. While newcomers perceive a strong sense of community, longtime residents say it pales compared with that of the past.
Any marketer can learn from this exercise. There’s inherent value in talking with your constituents – be they internal employees or external customers or prospects – to find out what they really think about a topic, an issue, a brand, a strategy. The output – interview transcripts, audio and/or video clips – is invaluable for anyone trying to take the pulse of a particular group. It can be used to inform decision-making and in some cases can also be packaged and served back to the community.
Sure beats the usual marketing-driven “thought leadership” that comes out of the executive suite.
Tim Russert, RIP Jun 14, 2008
Posted by magnostic in Broadcast TV, Journalism, Journalists, Media.Tags: Tim Russert
add a comment
Some consider “broadcast journalism” an oxymoron, but Tim Russert defied that derisive view. He was the ultimate newsman. In these days of stream-of-conscsiousness blogging masquerading as news, Russert stood out as a relentlessly prepared and fearless journalist, an objective reporter who had no other agenda than to get the truth out of politicians and other Washington power brokers. But as colleagues and friends noted in the many tributes pouring in since his sudden and unexpected death yesterday at age 58, he didn’t have a mean bone in his body.
As someone who always believed in the ideals of journalism, the art of interviewing, and the thrill of pursuing a hot story, I loved watching Russert perform his craft. He was a true master, and both journalism and politics will be much worse off without him.
Editor Quits, Causes Uproar, Returns: Just Another Day in the Tech Trade Press May 11, 2007
Posted by magnostic in Advertising, Journalism, Journalists, Media, Print publishing, Publishing.add a comment
Proponents of editorial integrity are claiming victory following the reinstatement of PC World Editor in Chief Harry McCracken, who had resigned two weeks prior in a dispute over a cover story that PC World CEO Colin Crawford apparently ordered McCracken to kill. Um, make that former CEO, as IDG Communications President Bob Carrigan abruptly shuttled Crawford back to the company’s online group after just three months as head of PC World and Macworld, clearing the way for McCracken’s return. [Disclosure: IDG was my employer between 2004-2006.]
As David Churbuck notes, trade publications have always been beaten up over their close associations with advertisers and the perceived impact of those relationships on editorial coverage. Churbuck says he never experienced any such pressure during his days in the newsroom at PC Week, and neither did I. In fact, PC Week’s publishers, particularly the legendary Don Byrnes, went to bat for me more than once against advertisers who were outraged over some perceived slight in our coverage. The pains we took to maintain the church-state division never lessened the hue and cry of the Mac zealots (followed by the Linux zealots) who were certain we were on Microsoft’s payroll.
That was years ago, when publishers still had some leverage and could afford to play tough when vendors threatened to pull their ads. Now, with ad dollars at a premium, it’s particularly satisfying to see the edit guys win one. It’s even more refreshing to see PC World’s bloggers discuss the situation so openly. That’s something that would not have happened five or 10 years ago.
Journalism ‘Pro Am’ Mar 20, 2007
Posted by magnostic in Consumer Generated Media, Journalism, Journalists, New Media, Publishing, User Generated content.add a comment
Cool experiment taking place at Assignment Zero, in which professional journalists are teaming up with the “crowd” (aka everyone else) to report and write articles on popular topics. The founders call it an open-source approach to journalism. One of the assignments is “crowdsourced journalism” – a look at the trend on which Assignment Zero itself is based. From Executive Editor Jay Rosen:
The investigation takes place in the open, not behind newsroom walls. Participation is voluntary; contributors are welcomed from across the Web. The people getting, telling and vetting the story are a mix of professional journalists and members of the public — also known as citizen journalists. This is a model I describe as “pro-am.”
The “ams” are simply people getting together on their own time to contribute to a project in journalism that for their own reasons they support. The “pros” are journalists guiding and editing the story, setting standards, overseeing fact-checking, and publishing a final version.
In this project, we’re trying to crowdsource a single story, and debut a site that makes other such reports possible down the road. But we don’t know yet how well our site and our methods work. Our ideas are crude because they are untested. By participating, you can help us figure this puzzle out.
Seems like a worthy exploration of next-generation journalism. I think I’ll sign up.
Oxymoron Alert: ‘Media Relations’ Mar 16, 2007
Posted by magnostic in Journalism, Journalists, Marketing, Media relations, PR.2 comments
Quiz time: You work in PR and you receive an email or voice mail from a reporter on deadline requesting an interview. Your company or client is not particularly interested in commenting, either because of the topic, the size of the publication, or its target audience. Do you:
- a) Ignore the request, figuring that if it’s important enough the reporter will email or call back.
b) Ignore the initial and all subsequent requests, reasoning that you don’t know the reporter and/or the publication he is writing for, so the request is not worth your time
c) Tell the reporter that you are checking into your executives’ availability and will be back in touch – then do nothing or simply forget about the request as you move on to more pressing matters.
d) Thank the reporter for the request but explain that your company/client is not interested in participating in the story.
I experienced each of those scenarios during my reporting last month for a feature on outdoor advertising. I can handle rejection, so d) is cool. I can respect the overwhelming number of requests that flacks at major brands receive each day, so even a) is grudgingly acceptable. But when so-called “media relations” people don’t bother to return or even acknowledge legitimate requests from reporters, they’re not doing their job. Don’t ignore me, or worse, don’t insult me by saying “we’ll get back to you” when you have no intention of doing so.
What are you thinking? Maybe you’ve figured out the whole consumer empowerment thing and assume you can disintermediate journalists and take your message directly to your customers. Maybe you’re just lazy. Or ignorant. Here’s one response I received from the Manager of North American Sales and Service Communications at a large U.S. automaker (OK, it was Ford):
Could you explain exactly what you’re talking about? I have no idea what out of home advertising is.
I fear for you.
24-Hour Newspaper People (New York Times) Jan 15, 2007
Posted by magnostic in Blogging, Journalism, Journalists, Media, Publishing.1 comment so far
Nice piece by David Carr on the addictive qualities of blogging and its impact on journalists and journalism. Because blogging is so personal (even if you’re doing it for your employer), Carr reasons that he has become much more engaged with his readers – so much so that he claims he actually called a frequent commenter who was “off the grid,” traveling in Israel and unable to post to Carr’s blog. He calls the interactions “feedback through a firehose,” and adds this point about the lure of the blog:
Tweaking the blog is seductive in a way that a print deadline never is. By the time I am done posting entries, moderating comments and making links, my, has the time flown. I probably should have made some phone calls about next week’s column, but maybe I’ll write about, ah, blogging instead.
I feel the same way. I can noodle around in my blog for hours, researching the right topic, obsessing over my miniscule readership, trying (often failing) to write something thoughtful. It sure beats doing real work.
I do disagree with one quote Carr offers from Clay Shirky, an adjunct professor in the graduate interactive telecommunications program at New York University:
“The speed of conversation is a part of what is good about it, but then some of the reflectiveness, the ability for careful summation and expression, is lost.”
Shirky should read more blogs. There are plenty that are deeply reflective and highly expressive. (See my blogroll for several good examples.)
Carr closes on the topic of Web analytics, specifically on their potential negative impact on news judgment. He quotes Jim Brady, executive editor of the Washington Post:
“The best thing about the Web — you have so much information about how people use it — is also the worst thing. You can drive yourself crazy with that stuff. News judgment has to rule the day, and the home page cannot become a popularity contest.”
But as long as page views rule the roost, that’s exactly what the home page is. Publishing bosses will continue to obsess over traffic numbers as long as they continue as the primary revenue driver. And that’s why you’ll continue to see stories about nipple covers paired with news coverage of the hanging of Hussein’s half-brother in Iraq on CNN.com.
The Branded Journalist Jan 8, 2007
Posted by magnostic in Journalism, Journalists, Media, New Media, Personal branding, Publishing.7 comments
Once upon a time, the only celebrity journalists were network news anchors and the 60 Minutes gang. Newspaper and magazine editors would bludgeon any reporter who tried to become bigger than the story he was reporting, or to somehow personally benefit from it. As a cub reporter in the 1980s, I certainly learned my place from a variety of hardscrabble editors who wanted their news staffs hunting down stories, not building their personal brands (which at the time would have been a laughable concept). I was an impartial observer, a chronicler of events and a storyteller, not a participant.
In the mid-1990s, when PC Week launched one of the first technology news websites, the editors struggled with the line that was beginning to blur between news reporter and columnist. Reporters wrote facts; columnists wrote opinions, and never the twain shall meet. We wanted the Microsoft beat reporter to talk to sources, interview users, and write painfully balanced stories about Windows and Office and IE, but we prohibited him to share his own informed opinions in print or online about the company – that would be a conflict of interest. (God knows many of our reader thought we were biased enough in our coverage without fueling their conspiracy theories by letting reporters write opinion pieces.)
Even then, however, the Web was forcing change. We needed personality on the site, so reporters were asked to start contributing weekly commentaries. Some refused. Others embraced the concept. And the lines between impartial news and opinion became blurrier.
Now, every journalist is encouraged to develop his or her own brand. If you’re not promoting yourself through TV appearances or your own blog, you’re a dinosaur. I’m reminded of this after reading today’s New York Times story about a Web-based political news startup called The Politico. Part of the article focuses on how a few mainstream journalists are making the jump to the new Web venture. The publication’s editor in chief, John Harris, is the former political editor at The Washington Post, and he posits about the unrelenting transition toward self-promotion:
“The most successful journalists these days have a promotional ethic that would be uncomfortable for a traditional journalist. I admire those people who say, ‘I don’t want to go on TV; my work speaks for itself.’ But I don’t think that’s realistic for people who want to have an impact.”
Jim VandeHei, the Politico’s executive editor and former national political correspondent for The Post, puts it even more succinctly:
“Reporters here will transcend the organization.”
So there you have it. We have reached the journalist’s equivalent of the NFL or the NBA, where players pound their chests after even the most basic plays and preen endlessly for the cameras. The team becomes secondary to the individual brand and the SportsCenter highlight.
I think that’s a shame. Does that make me a dinosaur?
