Becoming a Better Writer

What makes a good writer? What is it about a blog post, story, letter or column that makes it engaging, that makes someone want to continue reading? How can I become a better writer?

If you’re in the public relations, marketing, investor relations and/or strategic communications world, perhaps you’ve already asked yourself these or similar questions. I know I have.

The snap answer, of course,  is to write. I’ve heard and read that answer more than 100 times — “If you want to be a better writer then you have to write.”

Okay, duh! But in my experience writing alone is not enough, especially if you’re not a particularly good writer to begin with.

I believe that the most important part of improving your skills as a writer, to becoming a better writer, is to have a good editor (or a good teacher, as the case may be).

In other words, I want someone who is better than me looking over my metaphorical shoulder prompting, prodding and pointing out specific examples of how and where I can improve my writing.

This point was brought back home to me this morning when a long-time friend asked me to review something he had written, and for the record, he told me I could “let him have it from every angle.” So here, in part, is what I wrote to my friend.

•  
  • new,
  • unexpected,
  • controversial,
  • insightful,
  • thought-provoking or
  • out-of-the-ordinary.

Are the items I mention above hard and fast rules? Of course not.

But I know they helped me to become a better writer - that and having a good editor.

PR Hoax Hurts Integrity of National Press Club

Whether you work in the field of Public Relations or just happen to be a news junkie, chances are you already know about the PR hoax perpetrated this Monday to call into question the stance taken by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce on climate change.

In fact, a quick search of Google news for the terms “chamber commerce climate change” (not inside quotation marks) finds several hundred news stories on the subject.

The event was staged at the National Press Club (in Washington, D.C.) by an activist organization that calls itself the “Yes Men,” and it’s a group that has punked the news media before. As reported in the New York Times, the fake press conference also featured fake journalists and fake press materials designed to look as if they were produced on Chamber of Commerce materials. And a number of major news outlets were fooled by the hoax, notably CNBC and Reuters (both of which later corrected and retracted their stories).

However, lost in all the hubub, hoopla and news coverage about the hoax is one critical point: I’m convinced that the Yes Men organization have also attacked and hurt the integrity of the National Press Club. Call it another example of the Rule of Unintended Consequences.

Certainly there are widespread examples of biased news organizations or media outlets that lean one political direction or the other. I get that, and I hope that most people are savvy enough to understand this fact too.

Regardless of one’s viewpoint on any subject (including climate change), the United States of America was founded on several key principles, one of which is freedom of the press.

The National Press Clubbills itself as “The World’s Leading Professional Organization for Journalists,” and none other than noted CBS commentator, Eric Sevareid called the NPC the “sanctum sanctorum of American journalists.”

By choosing to hold its fake news conference at the National Press Club, the Yes Men organization have besmirched the good name and integrity of the National Press Club.

Please note that I am NOT suggesting that the Yes Men were wrong to stage a fake press conference. I’m only suggesting it should not have been held at the National Press Club.

And for that, I bestow a Sad Betty Award on the Yes Men for choosing to stage their PR hoax at the National Press Club. 

== = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

P.S.  To get a sense of what happened during the press conference when it was interrupted by a real representative of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, you might check out this YouTube video. It’s about six minutes long.

Google vs Newspapers: The Battle Rages On

I don’t often find myself agreeing with the acclaimed Op-Ed columnist for the New York Times, Maureen Dowd, but I do find her writing style engaging, even captivating.  However, after reading her column from today, “Dinosaur at the Gate,” I asked myself “what the heck will happen to the newspaper industry if they keep giving away content for free–or at least, if Google keeps giving it away for free?”

Then I asked myself, “well, what’s ‘free’ anyway?” I mean, it’s not really for free. They are selling online ads, but online don’t sell for near as much as the ads that run in the hard copy publications (which I don’t really understand since online ads, in my opinion, have an easier time getting someone to act since the action is merely a click!) so the publications aren’t making near as much as they used to. Coupled with what we know about the current economy, traditional media is losing money hand-over-fist, at least that’s what the reports say.

Enter Google and Craigslist. Google aggregates the news of the day and makes it searchable–from the news outlets that let their news be searched. Craigslist gives away something that newspapers used to make a ton of money off of: classifieds. According to a great story from The Atlantic, titled “When No News is Bad News,” even though “The New York Times, Los Angeles Times and Chicago Tribune are among those organizations that have spent many millions of dollars covering the Iraq War, with each outlet paying for multiple reporters, translators, full-time drivers, guards, bullet-proof armored cars, year-round office space, office managers, and security consultants with intelligence backgrounds to provide threat assessments. And all of them give that work away for free online.”

Kind of makes you think, doesn’t it? Or at least it should. Again, free is an interesting term, but the newspapers aren’t (usually) charging a subscription fee for the articles the same way they do to deliver it to your house, but they also aren’t paying for printing and distribution.

I can’t help but wonder what IS actually killing the newspaper industry? Classifieds seems like a bigger one than giving the content away online, but then I think they need to charge more for advertising online–a place where measurement is actually easier. And if newspapers can’t figure out how to measure the online viewership they need to look at companies like Omniture, which produces online metrics to see how people get to a site, what they do once there, and where they go after (in the simplest terms possible).

In Dowd’s column Eric Schmidt, Google’s CEO, says that for newspapers to get out of this mess, they need to “…invent a new product. That’s the way Google thinks. Incumbents very seldom invent the future.” Seems logical, but I see one problem with it: The “incumbents” haven’t invented much new about their service since the first paper was produced.

My solution is two fold. The industry as a whole needs to come together to find a solution that ALL agree on, and then follow it. That, or they need to hire some of the top minds from Google and find a better solution. What say you?

CNBC: Enjoying the Media Attention?

Love the network, or hate it, CNBC is riding high right now from what some may call ‘negative publicity.’ What I saw as the start to the war of words against CNBC, came from a rant by Jon Stewart, the host of the highly popular show called, “The Daily Show.” Stewart had another rant aimed at one of CNBC’s most famous hosts, Jim Cramer, with a follow up here, ultimately leading to a show (that probably raked in the ratings) when the two faced off on Stewart’s show.

All of this focus on CNBC has me wondering about one of the most profound questions effecting the PR industry, with opinions varying depending on who you ask: Is all press good press?

If I worked for CNBC my answer would be a resolute YES! Why? Even on Stewart’s own show, which is to be a humorous look at the days news (even though more often than not, they delve into very serious questions–often from a left-leaning perspective–and aren’t afraid to shy away from the tough questions to its guests), he showed video footage of the coverage his rant about Cramer received.

And since then, the New York Times published an article about how CNBC is thriving right now, not the least of which is because of the attention its been receiving from other media. From the article, “Whether the attention is positive or negative, it is certain that this tumultuous financial season is CNBC’s reason for being. One month shy of its 20th anniversary, CNBC is being jokingly called “the recession network” within the halls of its headquarters in New Jersey.” The article goes on to say “CNBC is a boon to NBC Universal’s bottom line; it has posted record profits for at least the last three years, and Mr. Hoffman says the first quarter of 2009 has been ‘very strong’ for the network.”

Time Magazine also got into the mix talking about the networks recent stance as the anti-Obama network, standing behind Wall Street, and not as most papers appear to be sympathizing with the folks who have been affected by what many have called the poor decision making by Wall Street. Regardless of your stance on this issue (which is a post for an entirely different blog :-), CNBC appears to be the big winner in all of this.

For me, the answer to the question depends on what the “press” is about–so in that sense, I don’t believe all press is good press.

I’d love to hear your take on the CNBC debate and/or your thoughts on whether or not you agree with the statement: “No press is bad press.”

On-the-Record? Yes, Always! And it Cuts Both Ways!

A few weeks ago I was at the monthly luncheon of the Utah County Chapter of the PRSA listening to Derek Garduno (a former Politis Communications employee), address the audience. (Derek’s currently the Communications Manager for the Utah Jazz.)

During his presentation, Derek shared a truism I had taught him years before when he was fresh out of college. Specifically,

“You’re always on-the-record.”

For those of you not trained in public relations or journalism, on-the-record is a term used by reporters and journalists that means that what you are saying (or doing) is fair game to be reported and can end up in the evening news, in tomorrow morning’s paper or in someone’s blog that’s getting posted in the next two minutes.

Sometimes it’s possible to go off-the-record to provide selected and trusted journalists with information - typically for contextual, background purposes - and not be quoted in a story.

However, not everyone can be trusted (journalists included).

So as a rule, we advise our clients and employees to simply adapt the attitude that you’re always on-the-record when speaking to a journalist, even if a reporter agrees that something is “off-the-record.” That way you play it safe and minimize the risk of getting burned by an unscrupulous and/or overzealous journalist.

So that’s the background. Now for the juicy parts of what happened earlier today and why I’m writing this specific post.

= = = = = = = = = =

In summary, after apparently not getting the help/information he wanted from a Toronto, Canada-based tech PR/marketing specialist, David George-Cosh (tech reporter with the National Post) went off on a phone call with said PR specialist.

At roughly 1 p.m. (EST) April Dunford, the PR specialist, posted the following on her Twitter account (@AprilDunford):

Reporter to me”When the media calls you, you jump, OK!?” Why, when you called me and I’m not selling? Newspapers will get what they deserve

[NOTE: Not counting the red text, this is exactly how the tweet appeared.]

Then began what can only be called a very public (and embarrassing) digital breakdown on the part of reporter George-Cosh, with the reporter dropping F-bombs onto Twitter directed at Dunford, and getting upset because of what she posted onto Twitter. (His Twitter handle is @sirdavid.)

Interestingly, Dunford did NOT disclose George-Cosh’s identity in her original tweet. It was apparently only after he repeatedly attacked her on Twitter that Dunford disclosed who the reporter was: George-Cosh.

For the record, if you look up George-Cosh’s Twitter account, it is (as of 9:30 p.m. EST) totally locked up with all of his updates “protected.” His blog also seems to be down: http://strangehold.com/blog/. His bio on the NP.com page is also missing.

However, you can read the blow-by-blow description here on Ian Capstick’s MediaStyle blog.

Learning a Lesson from a Twitter-based Têtê à Têtê Tornado

What’s the takeaway from all of this? It’s simple: You’re always on the record.

And in today’s Me Media world where literally anyone can become (and probably is) their own publisher, you have to be really careful about what you say and do when you’re around anyone.

And the higher profile you have (like being a tech reporter for one of the leading media outlets in Canada), the greater the likelihood your conduct will come under public scrutiny - and ridicule.

In other words, there is no such thing as off-the-record!

= = = = = = = = = =

UPDATE: At 6:18 p.m. (EST) today, the Editor of the National Post published the following apology on the NP’s Website:

“We hold — and will continue to hold — all our reporters to a higher standard in how they address anyone, in any forum.

Five Reasons Why Twitter Matters for PR Professionals

Anytime a new technology product or service begins to get national consumer play in media outlets like the Wall Street Journal, New York Times or CNN you know that product/service has reached the Tipping Point (a la Malcolm Gladwell’s book of the same name) and is well on its way to mass market acceptance.

That’s obviously the case with Twitter, a free social media tool that allows users to write and publish extremely short pieces on the Internet. How short? 140 characters tops.

Twitterers can also create a short bio which is hosted on a blog-like page inside of Twitter (one of my accounts can be seen at www.twitter.com/dpolitis). Users can then follow one another, sending microblog posts out into the general Twitterverse or directly to another individual via a Direct Message.

In less than three years since Twitter’s founding in March 2006, more than six million Twitter accounts have been created, with close to four million active Twitterers last month.

And yet, the purpose of this post is not to provide a Twitter 101 primer - there are several other resources that do just that.

Rather this post is designed to specifically address the issue of the near- and long-term viability of Twitter as a potentially valuable communications tool/service for use in the public relations arena, particularly for media relations.

During more than 25 years as a public relations/marketing communications professional, particularly working with technology companies of all varieties, I have seen dramatic changes in the tools and services that we PR pros use to conduct our campaigns and programs.

That said, after nine months of using and experimenting with Twitter, I am totally committed to ongoing and expanding use of Twitter - for myself, for our agencies (Politis Communications and SOAR Communications), and for our clients.

Here (in reverse order) is my list of five reasons why Twitter matters for PR professionals, especially in the realm of publicity and media relations.

5.   More journalists/bloggers/media outlets begin using Twitter every day (and the more journalists, bloggers & media outlets on Twitter, the better Twitter becomes as a tool for PR people).

It only makes sense that the number of journalists using Twitter is growing right along with the overall growth of the service.

Can I put quantitative figures behind this assertion? No.

But I can point the interested PR person toward two links that will help them begin to build a list of editorial types on Twitter: namely, Twellow and the My Creative Team wiki.

Specifically, Twellow is an independent, Twitter-focused search engine, and you can use it to search for just about any one individual or any group of people, including journalists and bloggers.

Similarly, the wiki from My Creative Team includes lists of both journalists and media outlets on Twitter.

There are also a growing list of posts that contain their own breakdown of journalists on Twitter, such as this list from Carlos Granier-Phelps on Red66.com. (Make sure you check out the more than 70 comments for additions to Granier-Phelps’ initial list, some of which were added within the last week.)

The point is journalists (and media outlets) continue to adopt Twitter, and this trend does not appear to be slowing down or stopping.

4.   Twitter provides a new mechanism for connecting with journalists.

Back when I got started in PR more than two-and-a-half decades ago, we used printed directories of media outlets and contact information to help identify editorial team members.

Such databases still exist, but most have moved to an electronic format, at a minimum these are encapsulated onto a CD-ROM or DVD, or better yet, maintained online so they are accessible in real-time 24X7. A number of these services, like Cision, also contain information about the individual preferences of these journalists.

Additionally, many (but not all) media outlets have Websites, many of which contain the names, titles, beats and contact information for their reporters and editors.

Certainly, search engines like Google and Yahoo! have also shown they can be valuable services in the PR toolkit for indentifying which journalists cover what topics and what they’ve written about or covered in the past.

Now . . . enter Twitter.

Central to the entire concept of Twitter is the ability to identify individuals and/or organizations one is interested in and to be able to learn about what’s important to them. In addition, there’s also the potential to follow and be followed by said journalists.

All of which makes it easier to begin to develop the beginnings of a relationship, be it professional, personal or both.

3.   Cream rises to the top.

Just because a so-called PR pro has identified a reporter on Twitter, that doesn’t mean she has good Twitter etiquette.

Specifically, if all you do is use Twitter to pitch story ideas or hound a journalist about covering your employer or clients, you will quickly find yourself banished to the Twitter garbage bin and “blocked” from contacting said journo.

And if you’re really pesky and break Twitter’s own rules, you’ll probably find your account suspended from the Twitterverse. That wouldn’t necessary prevent you from creating a new Twitter account and starting all over again. Regardless, bad form is still bad form and cretins tend to remain cretins.

Remember, that Twitter is part of the entire social media landscape, the Web 2.0 world, a world centered around openness and conversations.

The best PR practitioners understand this and are true PR pros in every sense of the word.

Such professionals understand that passing along information to a reporter that is germane to his/her beat is a good idea, a smart idea, even if it means such efforts generate zero media coverage in the process.

What a concept! It’s called the Golden Rule. It’s called common courtesy. It’s called being nice to other people.

The best PR people also understand the constraints and restraints placed on journalists. They understand deadlines and beats and assignments and journalistic integrity and many (if not most) of the ins and outs of the media world. And they respect the editorial professionals who do their best to create new news product day in and day out, particularly in countries that enjoy freedom of the press.

 Just because Twitter is a new service, one that allows near real-time interaction and connectivity with anyone, but especially journalists, real PR pros do NOT abuse such capabilities. Instead, they judiciously use Twitter to meet end goals and objectives while respecting the needs and wants of others.

2.   Media relations is STILL about the story idea (or the angle or the fit).

Although some media types claim that they never use information or materials provided by a PR person, the truth is that smart journalists recognize that good sources can come from anywhere and from anyone.

That’s why the most key element of successful media relations efforts is finding the right story idea for the right journalist at the right media outlet at the right time.

Just because Twitter is some newfangled technology tool doesn’t obviate this fact.

Case in point, use Twitter to “pitch” a non-tech story to one of the many C/NET journos on Twitter and 99.9 percent of the time your pitch will fail.

Conversely, pitch a cycling story via Twitter to @FredCast or @carltonreid and chances are you’ll generate serious interest.

Bottom line? Wasting a reporter’s time is NEVER a good idea. That’s been true for as long as I’ve been in PR, and just because I can pitch a journalist an idea in 140 characters doesn’t mean I’m gonna be successful if I’ve got

• the wrong reporter,
• the wrong media outlet,
• the wrong story idea,
• at the wrong time.

1.   It’s the 140 characters, stupid!

With credit given to James Carville - he’s the consultant who gave Bill Clinton the phrase, “It’s the economy, stupid” - in Twitter, it’s all about the 140 characters.

That’s it. Everyone has the same limitations.

Even if you use such tricks as URL shorteners to display a Web address within a tweet, such as TinyURL.com or bit.ly, there is no guarantee anyone will click on your shortened URL.

You still have a mere 140 characters to catch someone’s attention, and this reality is multiplied many times over for media types who get pummeled with long-winded, poorly written and off-topic story ideas day after day after day.

Microblogging a story pitch to a journalist inside of Twitter is like the elevator pitch in the VC world. Get it right and doors begin to open. Screw it up, and that door may never open.

Consultants working with businesses looking to raise money from venture capitalists tell the executives to shorten their business proposition down to an “elevator pitch.” In other words, they’re told, make sure you can describe your company’s value propostion between floors when riding an elevator.

Those entrepreneurs who can best fulfill this elevator pitch guideline have the best chance of catching the attention of a prospective investor, and that’s just the potential beginning of a relationship between a company and an investor.

Microblogging a story pitch to a journalist inside of Twitter is like the elevator pitch in the VC world. Get it right and doors begin to open. Screw it up, and that door may never open.

In that regard, creating the perfect Twitter pitch is rarely something that’s thrown together; rather, perfect Twitter pitches tend to be crafted, often offline first where they’re vetted and reviewed before being DMed directly to a journalist.

And with only 140 characters to play with, precise brevity is key.

Bonus Idea: Create Unique Twitter Accounts for Your Company/Client, Product/Service or Individual

One last thought.

Although you’re limited to 140 characters per each microblog post within Twitter (also known as a “tweet”), you have fewer limitations if you create a separate Twitter account for your company, client, product, service and/or individual.

Case in point. If you visit www.twitter.com/SchwinnTailwind, you will find the Twitter account that we (SOAR Communications) recently created to promote the new Tailwind brand electric bike from Schwinn Bicycles.

In addition to creating the layout so it fit within the corporate brand identity for both Schwinn and the Tailwind, we also crafted a page background that allowed us to highlight a few key facts that we believe differentiate the Tailwind from other eBikes.

We also listed the booth address (#74840) where Schwinn will be exhibiting this week at the Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas, as well as contact information for journalists interested in checking out the Tailwind at CES09.

Has it worked? Well, it certainly hasn’t hurt as we’ve got interviews, demo rides and briefings set with some of the top media outlets attending CES, including a slot coming early this morning on The Today Show — so you tell me. 

Your Thoughts?

So what do you think? Did I nail the top reasons why Twitter matters to public relations professionals or do you have a different list altogether? Or do you disagree with the premise entirely and feel that Twitter is merely a passing fad?

Please include your thoughts, additions and/or deletions to this list in the comment section below. And on Twitter as well. 

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

AUTHOR’S NOTE: A special thank you to everyone who has participated thus far in the weekly #journchat sessions every Monday evening, 7-10PM CST. In addition, a special thanks to Sarah Evans (@PRsarahevans) for her role in envisoning, creating and organizing the virtual @journchat meetups as a vehicle for PR and media professionals to engage and share on a weekly basis - all via Twitter.

The TechCrunch Manifesto

The PR/Journo — Sharks and Jets — fight just went another round thanks to everybody’s favorite tech blogger Michael Arrington. Michael is no newcomer to slamming down the PR industry. The problem with this back and forth, I believe, is that it’s more about egos than actually fixing a problem — and that’s on both sides of this little war 2.0.

No one likes to be told what they’re doing is wrong, that’s a fact. And changing the behavior of an industry takes a lot more than a vicious, embarrassing blog post by a journalist/blogger. While it seems cliche to say, the only thing constant these days is change. We are all learning, both on the PR side and the journalist side. The lines have blurred, however, because there are a lot of bloggers who get the online media tools a lot better than some journalists and therefore become a very visible, vocal minority for the journalism field.

A discussion that has still not been put to rest: Are bloggers journalists? The answer, I think is yes, but it depends. Do I consider TechCrunch journalists, sure, they report the news in a timely fashion, while they are subjective, that’s why I read blogs, and that’s the difference between a blog and a newspaper. But the heart of story finding and reporting are both present in blogs. I like working with bloggers, they usually are more down to earth, and more open to building a relationship. But, this latest tirade by Arrington leads me to question my stance on whether I can/should lump bloggers in with journalists.

Arrington’s antics include the announcement that his tech news site, TechCrunch, will no longer honor NDAs and embargoes. Wow! Talk about killing a fly with an axe. This is really too bad, because it creates a couple problems for journalists, PR peeps and companies trying to get coverage:

• TechCrunch is a huge site, and has a tremendous following. How many PR peeps or companies will think twice before offering TechCrunch exclusives.
• TechCrunch’s stance gives the journos a bad image. Let’s be honest, NDAs have been broken, but to outright say that one will give his/her word and then break it, come on! There are a lot of good journalists who are willing to honor these agreements because it’s good for them, their publication and their readers.
• Trust is a huge part of the relationship between PR peeps, companies and journalists. Throwing that out will create a very chaotic, back-stabbing environment and no one will prosper — not TechCrunch, not anybody.

Sure, we can all do a better job.

But I think this response is ridiculous. I understand Michael’s frustration. How about on the PR side? When a blogger or journalist breaks an embargo, we look bad too, and it hurts our relationships as well. But taking the low road is always wrong. Honestly, I’d rather a reporter tell me “no, I won’t honor embargoes,” and show some integrity, than to lie about it.

This is a problem to which I don’t know if there is a simple solution. I can’t control what other PR peeps do any better than Michael can control how well his competitors enforce embargoes. But I do know that this is a foolish stance to take. I think the bigger company has the bigger responsibility. I also think this needs to be an ongoing discussion, PR folks obviously benefit from the media, and if I’m doing my job right, the media benefits from what I’m doing — whether I pitch the story, or just put the facts and info out there to be found.

Here’re what others in the industry have said about the No Embargo Manifesto:

Fantastic, thanks a lot. Besides being dishonest and douchebaggy in a purely human sense, it is basically a Hobbesian rebellion against the social contract and industry norms that we all follow for our own good. If everyone keeps the embargo, everybody–including the reader–wins. If one publication, acting in self interest, breaks embargoes as a matter of policy, everybody loses, including the rebelling publication.

~Kyle Monson, Web Editor at PC Mag

And this,

But in this bruising contest, TechCrunch clearly does not dominate, based on its size, as it did with the easier press release exclusives. In the new environment, in fact, tiny little voices that are accurate and insightful have just as much impact.

So, my takeaway from Arrington’s rant could be boiled down to three words: “GIVE ME EXCLUSIVES!”

~Kara Swisher, BoomTown

Michael is definitely outspoken, and while I don’t agree with his choice to blatantly violate embargoes, I do think savvy PR minds should weigh in.

What are your thoughts?

Want Better Results? Write Better Headlines!

Regardless of the specific industry you work in, everyone is always looking for ways to be more successful and generate better results. For those of us with marketing and/or communications responsibilities, that means getting more people to read, listen to and/or watch our stuff.

Why? Because the more people we can engage with our marketing/communications stuff the more successful we will be and that invariably means MONEY!

So if you really want better results, that means writing better headlines . . . at least that’s what MarketingSherpa says.

MarketingSherpa is one of the leading publishers of information and data on what really works in all areas of marketing and marketing communications. They have hundreds of thousands of subscribers to their free online newsletters, and do a substantial business in selling reports and studies and producing conferences around the U.S.

Last week, MarketingSherpa.com ran a great story in their online newsletter titled “4 Takeaways from MarketingSherpa’s Newsletter Subject-Line Analysis.” (Not necessarily the snappiest headline, but it does follow one of the four rules. See below.)

In summary, MarketingSherpa had their own people go back and analyze every headline for every article they had published in the last year to see if they could identify which articles were the most successful. Naturally, each article topic stands on its own and one topic may be inherently more interesting and/or relevant to more people than the rest.

But by the time they were all done - particularly analyzing click-to-opens (the number of people who clicked on a link to see an entire article) and reviewing clickthroughs (the number of times people clicked on a link within, or connected to, an article) - they came up with Four Takeaways, namely

1. The first two words in any headline are the most critical (such as How To, Top 12, Simple Email, and HTML vs, among others),
2. Use “trigger words” in your headlines (you’ll need to read this one because there isn’t a simple rule to follow, but they did suggest you “dedicate at least a few hours to the subject line“),
3. Avoid hard-sell headlines or headlines that ask for reader action (NOTE: The worst performing 10 headlines for MarketingSherpa last year ALL USED HARD-SELL LANGUAGE OR REQUESTED READER ACTION), and
4. Use “hot brands” in headlines wherever possible and practical (headlines that included company names like Facebook, Google and Wikipedia pulled the best for MarketingSherpa articles).

They also came up with a BONUS TAKEAWAY, which is

• Shorter headlines are ALMOST ALWAYS better (but there are exceptions, and MarketingSherpa provides a few examples).

This article has really inspired me to work smarter, harder and longer (when necessary) when it comes to writing any headline.

I believe that anyone who is focused on following the principles of The Betty Factor will do the same.

Blogs vs Traditional Journalism: Are Lines Being Blurred?

According to some bloggers,and traditional media/journalists the Associated Press (AP) is trying to change it’s style.

If the new AP boss in Washington has his way, gone are the days were journalistic writing stays objective and covers both sides of an issue, and new are the days where emotive language and first person writing become the norm.

My first response after reading this news was that true journalistic integrity will be ruined if personal feelings, which many already speculate are clouding good media judgement, interfere with an accurate portrayal of the news. However, after reading a separate article from Ragan’s Daily Headlines it became clear that a lot of bloggers were up in arms about the announcement, which made me wonder why. (more…)

Deseret News Cuts 34 Positions as Ad Revenues Fall 32%

The Deseret News (the daily newspaper started more than 150 years ago by Brigham Young), has eliminated 34 editorial positions in a cost-cutting move following a 32 percent in advertising revenues since January 2008.

According to Paul Beebe’s story in today’s Salt Lake Tribune (the cross-town and cultural rival of the DNews), the Deseret News had had 200 journalists on its staff, which was pared down through layoffs, buyouts and attrition.

As part of the cutbacks, the DNews will no longer publish a separate edition in Utah County, arguably the most conservative county in the state that bears the nickname of “Happy Valley.” The paper will, however, continue to staff a pared back bureau in Utah County (currently based in Orem near the top of the so-called “diagonal,” the stretch of 1200 North that drops into Provo from the plot of land housing University Mall).

The DNews has, however, closed is bureau in Washington, D.C. It will also do away with its standalone business section, which will be moved into its “first” or A section of the paper.

(more…)