Journalism reaffirms its influence

Across the globe, the rise of social media and citizen journalism is putting pressure on established media brands.  Stories once broken by daily newspapers are now posted on the internet directly by their source.  A declining number of journalists work harder to tell their stories on a growing array of platforms.  And communications professionals scratch their heads as they try to engage companies, governments and charities in the new media environment.

People who saw the social media revolution as another channel for celebrity gossip thought again when it played such a central role in the revolutions of Egypt, Tunisia, Libya and beyond.  According to the Arab Social Media Report by the Dubai School of Government, nearly 9 in 10 Egyptians and Tunisians used Facebook to organise protests or spread awareness about them in March 2011.  On Twitter, the hashtag “Egypt” had 1.4 million mentions in the first three months of the year, and “Jan25”, the date that the popular uprising began in Egypt, had 1.2m mentions.  

The speed and authenticity of these powerful grassroots media helped them mobilise thousands of people.  They created community and common interest that overcame the fear of repression.  They showed how media can reach out to everyone and lead to real action and change.

But the tragic death of a journalist yesterday, Marie Colvin of the Sunday Times, and the outpouring of praise for her courage and her work shows that we are far from the death of professional journalism.  Her reports brought home the day to day reality of people living in unimaginable circumstances.  Her last report, and its heartbreaking images of a dying child, showed how trusted independent journalists have the power to reach millions and open the eyes of the world.  While social media led to action on the ground, perhaps it will be a more traditional form of journalism that leads to action from the Syrian regime and the international community.

In reality, the debate about traditional versus social media is a sideshow.  Content is the fundamental.  And it takes a combination of platforms to convey the powerful emotion, first hand evidence and third party analysis that can together lead to change.

Jon Bennett, Director, Linstock Communications

Swift resolution should have seen off Suarez shame

It’s rare that a sportsman adorns both the front and back pages of national weekend papers, and it normally means one of two things. An heroic achievement beyond the norm, or a public indiscretion beyond the pale. Unfortunately for Liverpool player Luis Suarez, he finds himself rooted firmly in the latter camp - the new poster boy of sport’s ‘Hall of Shame’. Refusing to shake the hand of Manchester United player Patrice Evra would in most circumstances simply be seen as bad manners, or a crude attempt at the time honoured sporting practice of ‘mind games’. But in the context of this match, and the two players’ personal history, it was dynamite.


After being found guilty of misconduct and fined £40,000 for racially abusing Patrice Evra, Suarez has found himself at the centre of a wider debate on race and racial discrimination. Suarez’s comments came amidst a media still digesting the recent conviction of two of the murderers of black teenager Stephen Lawrence. For many commentators, there was an obvious link to be made between the Stephen Lawrence case and his comments, with the latter a clear indication of the persistence of racism on terraces and within British society; racism responsible for Stephen’s death. Fair or not, Suarez’s comments neatly dovetailed with current social commentary.


Given this combustible context, Suarez and his manager Kenny Dalglish’s actions represent a huge own goal for Liverpool (sorry!) on two important communications principles. Firstly, make sure there are clear channels for internal communications. In times of crisis, it is vital that people within an organisation are aware of each other’s future actions and sing from the same sheet. A number of people have suggested that Dalglish was shocked that Suarez refused to shake Evra’s hand, this can only have occurred through a breakdown in internal communications. Secondly, identify an opportunity to draw a line under bad publicity. The handshake at the start of Liverpool’s game against Manchester United presented the perfect chance to bring a resolution to the issue. Instead, Suarez’s actions meant both he and Liverpool were in the weekend papers for all the wrong reasons. To make matters worse, Dalglish’s post-match comments criticising the media and refusing to condemn his player’s actions meant further opprobrium. As a blueprint for how to mess up external communications, it’s a pretty thorough one.


Race and racial prejudice is quite rightly an emotive issue, and coverage criticising Liverpool’s handling of the issue has spread as far as the New York Times. There have even been suggestions that lucrative sponsorship deals are under threat. The result has been an inevitable apology from player and manager, but the lesson learnt must be to never allow pride to get the better of effective communications.


John Hood
Consultant
john@linstockcommunications.com

Swimming against a Southern tide

Perhaps seeking to take advantage of the new devolutionary agenda a new movement for the North has recently sprung up, the Hannah MitchellFoundation. 

The call, from a group of Labour MPs, is for the North to be granted greater devolved powers to counter what they say has been years of recession while the South has sailed merrily along.

But we have been down this route before. Plans for a regional assembly in the North East were defeated in a referendum. The Northern Way has come and gone. The Regional Development Agencies are in their dying days. It would seem the regional agenda has moved on and off the political agenda.

The current Government are more interested in local economies. What drives them, how do we create more jobs, what is it that will stimulate the private sector?  Those with an interest in the future prosperity of the North might be better served to push at this more open door rather than resurrect previous models.  They will also need to demonstrate private sector backing for reform, and, as we have seen with Local Enterprise Partnerships, getting business involved is often the hardest part.

Businesses need to be persuaded that it is in their short and long term interests to devote time and resources to strategic issues that spread out far beyond their immediate responsibilities. Ultimately this may come down to cash investment. No doubt business support for a Mayor in Liverpool has been greatly boosted by the promised investment of more than £100m in the local economy.  But it seems unlikely that the private sector is going to be convinced that another wide ranging regional body is the answer.  With LEPS already set up across the north, perhaps the pragmatic approach is to encourage these bodies to work more closely together on the big ticket strategic issues of relevance to the north as a whole, rather than create a further tier of decision making. 

Whatever route they choose to pursue, one thing seems clear.  Governance structures come and go, but the issues remain the same.  But it’s better to work with what you’ve got than try to redraw the map, which can be expensive and in many ways exasperating for the private sector.

Tony Cox 

tony@lnstockcommunications.com

@tonylinstock