First, even if you have media trained a client it is worth reminding them of a few practical points whenever they go afresh into the media spotlight – this includes a reminder that nowhere is ‘off limits’ if the story is big enough. You don’t say anything you don’t want broadcast until you are safely home, preferably alone and de-miked. Foot learnt this lesson many years ago over ‘off camera’ remarks on The Falklands to Robin Day but Gordon Brown was forced to learn it all over again with the Mrs Duffy remarks in the apparent haven of his car.

Second, traditional broadcast outlets are still ‘king’ when it comes to reaching large audiences in a compelling way. Television is like a strong raised stage versus the bear-pit come noisy public meeting space of the Internet. And much like the stage, broadcast is kinder to those who are physically attractive or enjoy mellifluous voices.

The use of libel law to force media retractions of untruths and injunctions to stop press intrusion into people’s private lives when there is no real national interest, has always been the very last resort. In honesty, both are used much more rarely than they could be.

In most cases, journalists want to get it right and will issue corrections quickly if you point out to them that a genuine error exists. However, there are a small number of cases where media are irresponsible and where they do trample over people’s privacy and lives in order to sell more of their wares.

Yes the law is flawed. If nothing else because it is so slow. But tales of libel ‘tourists’ don’t really stack up and the media only squeal because it means they can pay a very heavy price if they get something wrong. Well people, responsibility is the price of power. Whilst a small minority may be at fault, the damage done to people’s lives and to the staff and shareholders of businesses who are wronged is so serious that any significant watering down of our libel and privacy laws would most definitely NOT be in the public interest.

There are two related reminders for the public relations professional. First, if you provide a powerful visual image then it will up the amount of coverage you get. Bad news in a crisis, good when you are talking about more positive things than product recalls. Secondly, when you are a business serving international markets, you do need to take on board different national attitudes to appropriate attire and the related images dress conjures up.

I still remember, many years ago, as a ‘baby’ PR, rushing out to meet the directors of a major Italian company that was embroiled, unfairly, in a bribery scandal. They were heading into a press conference all wearing near identikit overcoats with the collars up and, despite the winter gloom, sunglasses. Any photographs would have made them look like Mafia and a quick change was required.

Sometimes, even the imagery public relations people provide to support positive news stories come back to bite them when there is a crisis. The images of ice skaters and powerful geysers exploding through the ice were manna from heaven for picture desks when my team launched Icesave. Two years later, when the banking industry hit metaphorical icebergs, the powerful imagery undoubtedly increased the number of times Icesave was referenced in the context of banks that faced problems. It wasn’t what sunk Icesave, but it certainly didn’t help.

Unless Toyota wants to risk being seen as cavalier about the safety of its customers it will need to respond fast with complete transparency and the rapid firing of anyone involved in the delay of international warnings and product recalls.

This will need to be followed up, and fast, with a well communicated and financed programme to ensure reparation to anyone who has suffered and to improve future product safety and recall processes.

Toyota has failed to deliver a number of the actions essential to surviving a reputational crisis. The company was slow to respond and it failed to understand that any problem that threatens public safety will prompt strong action from third parties – in this case the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. You need to act before you are made to and to go further than you probably need to. And the top man must take public ownership of the problem from the outset.

Product recalls are common in manufacturing, and the car industry is no exception. They don’t have to be a disaster. But fail to act fast, even if this makes the remedy more costly, and you will pay a heavy price for decades to come. No-one will forgive a company seen to put money and short term discomfort ahead of safety.

It’s high time the Royal Mail started a process of regularly sending its own undercover agents in so they can root out bad apples and poor practices ahead of those who will, quite justifiably, air the findings in public forums. Testing systems and quality processes and acting rapidly on the findings is part and parcel of any good crisis prevention programme. You’d do well to remember that if you look after a service important to the general public.

I am amongst those who believe we have a problem. Even if I didn’t, I would argue for cutting carbon emissions on the basis that there is enough credible scientific research and opinion out there to suggest that we owe it to future generations not to take any chances.

The IPCC and scientific communities around the world now have their work cut out for them in re-making the case on climate change. Hopefully a few lessons will have been learnt that most PR professionals learn in their first days in the job; never ever lie and don’t compromise a good strong case by exaggerating it – the facts should speak for themselves and an exaggeration uncovered can blow the strongest case out of the water.

Web site builders work on the basis of ‘build it, get some good content, do effective search engine optimization and our customers and key stakeholders will come’. Well, yes and no. People will come if they know that your organisation has something they need or want, but without this certainty you still need to go to them. Furthermore, they will go to a web site to browse and gather information; they don’t go in the expectation of getting good impartial advice and the sort of third party endorsement that lies at the heart of both social media and effective public relations programmes.

Effective social media strategies are about achieving dialogue with key stakeholders in the places that they are, rather than the places you want them to be. They are not a hard sell, they are not a mere presentation of your wares and they are certainly not a showcase for technical wizardry. This is why the lead players in a social media strategy will increasingly be drawn from the public relations profession. Our territory, after all, is the art of conversation, persuasion and corporate social responsibility. Furthermore, we are the most comfortable of all the disciplines in circumstances where we do not have complete control of the conversation.

Ad agencies also lay claim to the lead role, but their skills of delivering messages in an entertaining and brand enhancing manner are also, like web agencies, only a small part of the picture. I am not denying that the skills of both are needed within a good social media strategy, but I am arguing that the lead lies, like it or not with PR.

The reason is that most of the mindset and skills required for effective social media are the same as those held for decades by the public relations profession. Who else manages multiple voices in open public meetings, where many of those present are uninvited? Who else is trained to pick up threats to reputation arising from rumor, misrepresentation of facts or misunderstandings and to respond fast? And who else is used to presenting strategies, products and services to audiences, such as journalists and analysts, who will ask searching questions and certainly not be satisfied with flash presentation and one-way monologue?

ECCO has produced a Social Media Guide to help PR professionals to understand that social media is not a black art where you have to be under 25 or a technology wizard to engage in it. We hope it will help the senior PRs within more than 3,000 client companies around the world to stop backing away from taking ownership of a responsibility that so clearly lies within the PR domain.

Which social media tools – if any – are businesses in these sectors using? How integrated is social media in their communications? And if businesses aren’t doing more, why not?

So, if you’re a B2B brand and have 5 minutes to spare we’d be hugely grateful if you would share your experience with us – simply click on the link below to take part

http://www.zoomerang.com/Survey/?p=WEB229V6UC3UUK

In return we’ll enter you into a prize draw to win a luxury hamper – a little something special for the festive season! Thanks in advance from K+R marketing

To be perfectly honest, when I first looked at the results for the UK I wasn’t overly surprised.

The top value for 2006 – The Environment – has now slid down to sixth position. Social responsibility has also slipped three places as Innovation, Integrity and Customer Satisfaction nudge their way to the top. Meanwhile a value defined as Humanism – a people-based value relating to employee development and training, health and well-being – makes an entry into the Top 10 for the first time.

What this says to me is that UK companies are looking inward. Their focus is absolutely on delivering innovative products and services, a great customer experience and looking after their talent. These are all things you might expect in these current economic times when the need for survival takes over.

However, expect them as you might, I find these results hugely alarming. They suggest a knee-jerk reaction and a very blinkered, short-term view – one that overlooks the very real issue of climate change and the need for all of us to minimise our impact on the environment – and now. Easy to say, I know, more difficult to carry through when your business is under threat….perhaps. But when companies like K+R client InterfaceFLOR (www.interfaceflor.eu) show that environmental initiatives can actually save you money, it proves that you really don’t need to make a choice between environment and economy. (See founder Ray Anderson talking about this very subject here – http://tinyurl.com/yhopb37)

Also, we are talking about corporate values – the fundamental principles and behaviours on which businesses are based. In which case, we should not expect businesses to change them so dramatically in the space of two short years just because times have gotten tough. Should we? Surely now more than ever we should be living our core values, breathing them, making sure that everyone is aligned to them and delivers what we promise – every time. Am I being naïve? Am I underestimating the survival instinct? Is it a case of people claiming the values they believe will have most resonance with their customers and neglecting the ones that really matter? What do you think?

This post is from Janine Maxwell at K+R

This day one year ago was a different story.  Our phones and e-mail were in overdrive as media and worried account holders sought information.  The Icelandic Financial Supervisory Authority had taken control of Landsbanki on the day before, and this blow became fatal when The UK Chancellor of the Exchequer, Alistair Darling, announced that he was taking steps to freeze the assets of Landsbanki using, in a move that still looks outrageous, anti-terrorism legislation.

In the weeks and months beforehand we were riding a roller coaster.   First, ‘briefings’ to media by external bodies suggested wrongly that Icesave account holders would not be covered by the compensation scheme – and these briefings were undoubtedly designed to undermine Icesave as they began long before its future looked in doubt.  Then, of course, banks began to tumble and Icesave’s popularity meant it was right in the firing line.  The photographs of Iceland’s beautiful geography, so useful in the launch, became iconic images for a global banking meltdown and meant, inevitably, Icesave featured strongly in copy as the next ‘possible’ victim.

Icesave’s team in London were caught between the different needs and cultures of London and Reykjavik.  They were also fighting (actually very successfully) run after run caused by public panic every time negative reports hit the front pages.  The Icesave management’s biggest concern was, and remained throughout the crisis, the welfare of their customers.

Although the team had been in crisis mode from the point other banks started to wobble, we thought Icesave would survive.  The numbers we were dealing with showed a successful set of products, great customer loyalty and all of the information on Landsbanki’s financial situation looked robust.  There was no direct exposure to the sub prime markets that had been the downfall of others and Landsbanki was solvent and had just posted good half year financial results.  But of course life is more complicated than that.  Probably the best assessment I have seen so far of the reasons for it can be found in the Buiter and Sibert report available here.  Banks from other small countries with a large, internationally exposed banking sector and its own currency should take heed.

What did we all learn?  Well the twists and turns and our responses to them followed best practice and were pretty text book.  We helped halt the runs, we stuck to known facts, were open and honest and the London management team didn’t hide.  I suppose all we learnt was that you should never under-estimate the drastic measures people will take when facing new situations, different national cultures can make a bad situation impossible, and that some disasters are un-stoppable.