May 5, 2009

Old-School PR vs. New PR: The Methods Are Changing

Nice to see you again. Follow me, @SydneyOwen. Thanks for being here!

Since I was offered an internship at Weber Shandwick (that starts in August), I’ve added a column to my TweetDeck to monitor what people are saying about them. Yesterday, I noticed a post from @CraigPWood, an advertising and PR professor at Indiana University. 

He said: 

picture-2

Now, if you haven’t heard yet, Weber Shandwick and DiGiorno paired up and created a social media campaign for the launch of DiGiorno’s new flatbread pizza. The efforts included targeting influential bloggers and Twitter users. The idea? In short, people who host Tweet-Ups in LA, Chicago and NYC can experience DiGiorno flatbread pizza at their meeting.

Now, in my experience as an intern at Chipotle, I learned that you can rave about a product all you want, but putting it in the public’s hands is what really works. Chipotle spends little money on advertising, and a lot of money on feeding people through “hosted lunches”, where I’d bring in a big ole box o’ burritos, talk about Chipotle and their food, and then feed the group. 

So when DiGiorno decided to do the same thing (with a twist) I was floored. I think it’s a genius plan. And adding some personality to the brand never hurt anyone. This is the tweet from @DiGiornoPizza that upset @CraigPWood and spawned our lively discussion:

picture-3

Harmless and fun, I thought. But apparently the Gossip Girl tweet wasn’t appreciated by Craig. 

The short of it? Craig thinks that the DiGiorno account is deceptive. That Weber Shandwick isn’t ethical in the delivery of their messages (no pun intended). 

He also said this:

picture-4

Which makes me wonder, are we coming up on “old-school” PR vs. the PR of the future, much like journalism has been for the past few years? Is there going to be a generational gap between practitioners? On one side of the river, the old-school PR pros that are skeptical of social and how it’s shaping the industry. On the other side, PR pros like those on the DiGiorno team at Weber that are plowing through the industry with new ways to deliver the messages?

My thoughts? I think that the DiGiorno campaign is mixing marketing methods that are proven to work (let them taste it, don’t just tell them how great it tastes), and new methods, like Twitter, to deliver the ones that are tried and true. I don’t think there is any deception here. It’s been made perfectly clear who’s behind the DiGiorno campaign, and it was widely talked about it in my network on Twitter.

The methods are changing. I told Craig that the DiGiorno campaign was more effective than just a release about the new pizza. It’s a combination of the traditional tactics (releases, media alerts, etc) and the new social media tactics that will set a campaign on fire. None of these tactics can stand alone, they must be used in combination.

Social media is just a way to send the message. The best part about using tactics like Twitter is that participation is optional, if people don’t want to listen, they don’t have to. DiGiorno can learn a lot about their audience by seeing who is following. Granted, the Twitter audience won’t represent their target audience as a whole, but it does give them an idea of who is listening on that medium.

What do you think about more brands taking up Twitter as a way to push their product? What do you think about agencies that are implementing these tactics? Why aren’t more PR practitioners tapping into these networks to get exposure? 

Do you think there is a gap forming between old-school PR pros and the new-age PR pros? Will social media ever catch on with the old-schoolers?

And before you leave, make sure you check out my disclaimer in the About Me section. Thanks :)

  • Sydney - you raise an interesting point. More and more we are seeing full-on integration of social media into marketing plans. It's an effective way to create awareness and get a message out. The tricky part is MEASURING it's effectiveness. Determining social media ROI is still something that is difficult, but not impossible to measure. Companies want to know what they're getting out of the time spent twittering and blogging about their product or service.

    Secondly, what do you think is the most effective way for a business to use Twitter. For example, should Digorno ONLY tweet about product-related ideas, or should they connect on personal levels? Should they reply to a follower who's talking about a football game, or about a new blog? The one thing that I sway back and forth on is how personal a business should get when it comes to social networking. It seems ineffective to tweet something like 'Try our new Flatbread pizza' - but can you really be personal as a brand? Consumers want that connection, so how does a a company give it to them?
  • Good post, and since I followed all the discussion through Twitter last night, I can say that it was a great one.

    I have to say that I agree with Daniel. I'm not a "gap" believer. Just because Craig may have a more traditional approach towards PR, doesn't mean that everyone his age feel inadequate when using Twitter, blogs and so on.

    Now, on to the brands. I think it's great that brands try different things. I also don't think that using social media is always the best way to promote your product, image or whatever. But just trying it, talks positively about them, since they are willing to try new things, different approaches.

    It's not about getting it always right, but about trying to.

    We are still learners when it comes to social media.
  • Why does it have to be old school vs. new school, Gen Y vs. Baby Boomer, old fashion vs. cutting edge? Don't you think there's just good PR and bad PR. In the end, it's the results that matter: the bottom line. Whatever campaign affects the bottom line is the effective one.
  • Excellent point, Daniel. Thank you for sharing.

    I don't know that it is old school vs. new school. I'm asking if that's where this is going. I think there could be a potential gap in the schools of thought, and maybe it does all come back to good PR vs. bad PR. I think the generational stuff is what shapes what is good PR and bad PR though. What is good PR to me may be bad to a practitioner of a different generation.
blog comments powered by Disqus

Previous post:

Next post: