By: Rebeka Dickerson
Public relations is often confused by the general public with many other industries, but specifically marketing and advertising. The three are so similar that they are even commonly integrated these days. And then there is journalism which is frequently mentioned in the PR world as well. So, to help provide a better understanding of these four important communication mediums, I am providing some information below about what makes each unique.
Public relations is all about awareness and reputation. Awareness and reputation can in turn help a company sell products or become successful. PR deals with the long game; keeping customers coming back and obtaining new loyal customers.
An example of PR is the #IceBucketChallenge. The 2014 viral campaign raised awareness for ALS by inspiring people to post videos of themselves being drenched by a bucket of ice water and/or donating for ALS research. Many celebrities participated and over $115 million dollars was raised for the ALS Association.
Marketing is a technique for stimulating a demand for a specific product or service. The main goals are to make a product or service widely known and to increase sales. The transaction of something in the moment matters more than what will happen with the company in two or three years. Professionals in this industry often refer to product, price, place, and promotion as the four Ps of marketing needed to sell goods or services.
An example of marketing is Spotify and how it is is marketed differently than other music applications. Spotify assists users in finding music they have never heard before. Users can click any category of music and explore a multitude of artists. Spotify also sorts music options by music someone may want to workout to, sleep to, or even play video games to.
Advertising is a paid message. It is a part of marketing (promotion). It can also be part of a public relations campaign. An advertisement could be a television commercial, but it could also be a print ad, digital ad, radio ad, billboard, and so on.
Examples of companies that are known to continuously use ads to their advantage are Geico, Ford, and Nike.
While public relations has a target audience, journalism does (or should) not. Journalism’s purpose is to simply inform the general public in an objective way. A PR professional’s job is to advocate for a specific company or individual, while a journalist is traditionally meant to remain unbiased.
Examples of Journalism can vary. The many types include broadcast, investigative, opinion, entertainment, political, and sports.
A Couple Examples of Integration
As part of its brand awareness strategy, Coca-Cola has combined PR and journalism by utilizing storytelling on its website (https://www.coca-colacompany.com/). This is also known as brand journalism. Stories on the website detail how the company supports the community, how they promote diversity and inclusion, and how they help the environment.
The brand Always has an ongoing PR campaign #LikeAGirl, which encourages people to change the meaning of the phrase and how society views girls and women. A popular Super Bowl advertisement was created to promote the campaign in 2015 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F_Ep0O5fWN4).
So although similar, all four of these industries definitely have their own place. They each have their own distinct objectives. Yet they all work with the public in mind, and any of them can be combined strategically to create even greater success.
By Kristina Keeling
Trends in social media come and go, and the big trend right now is live streaming. So how are we, as PR professionals, supposed to know if we should jump on the bandwagon or let it run its course? This week, we take a closer look at the live streaming trend to see if this is something we should take seriously.
Life On Air released this mobile live streaming app in February 2015. When you start recording, it sends an automated tweet telling others that you are live via Meerkat. It was a huge hit – for the first few days – and then twitter decided to pull the plug on its Application Programming Interface (API). Without this software, Meerkat couldn’t integrate Twitter’s social graphs. So what does this mean? Well, when new users joined, they weren’t automatically connected to those they followed on Twitter. This hinders Meerkat because users won’t be automatically notified by the app when friends are broadcasting unless they manually build their followers. This, in turn, means people will not be on the app.
In response to Twitter’s decision to block access to their API and social graph, Meerkat’s CEO, Ben Rubin, told Yahoo Tech, “We are definitely going to start our own network. We are already starting to decouple the social graph.” In the meantime, the app released an update to help users connect, so now users can search for others by their Twitter username.
Why was Twitter so intent on shutting down Meerkat? Well, with a quick Google search, I found out that Twitter bought a competitive app, Periscope, in March 2015 – just after Meerkat launched. Periscope works similarly to Meerkat in that it allows others to know when you are live streaming via tweets and notifications. Twitter pulled their API and made it harder for Meerkat to be integrated with the platform, thus making Periscope the only live streaming app that is seamlessly connected to Twitter.
A quick breakdown of the apps
The layouts of the two services are different, but both are user friendly. When you open Meerkat you are brought to a “landing page” where you can let your followers know what is happening. In Meerkat you are able to schedule live streams, so you can let your followers know that you will be live in the near future or that you are talking about a topic right now. When you scroll down on the landing page you can see who is live now, and further down you can see what is scheduled.
When you open up Periscope, you see who on your followers list is live, followed by featured live streams and your followers’ most recent live streams. Periscope also offers a world map and a list view of who is live.
In short, both apps offer attractive features.
Which one should I use?
In terms of popularity, Periscope is definitely winning the race between live streaming services. Each app, however, has its own advantages and disadvantages that may suit your personal preference. Personally, I enjoy the world map on Periscope seeing who is live streaming around me, but I do like how you can schedule live feeds on Meerkat. Since I downloaded the apps, I have definitely checked Periscope more often, as it has the advantage of notifying me when the people I follow are live streaming.
Live streaming is definitely still in its infancy. I was expecting to see more people I personally knew using the apps and was surprised at how few used them. I do think that live streaming will gain more popularity when major events, such as pro baseball and football championships roll around. Live streaming apps will have an advantage because they will allow people to feel like they are really at the event. Celebrities and major influencers in the social media world will be able to live stream the backstage experience, or other things at major events.
“The Sleeping Giant of Live Streaming”
Periscope and Meerkat might soon have some competition in the live streaming realm, as YouTube recently released its own live streaming capabilities. YouTube will likely target different audiences for its live streaming services, though. Right now, YouTube live streaming is popular with the sports and gaming audience. Once more YouTube “creators” jump on board the live streaming trend though, YouTube may be the go-to destination for live streaming.
I think that live streaming is here to stay – for a while, at least. It is a great tool for instant news and entertainment. What do you think? Is live streaming here to stay? Comment below with your thoughts on Meerkat, Periscope and YouTube Live, and don’t forget to follow IPR on Facebook, Twitter and Instagram.
By Raysha Sally
As communication styles change and social media becomes more and more an everyday part of life, society has adapted. Public relations professionals often see social media as a tool for reaching our publics, and though we all know there are negatives to social media can, I believe most professionals would agree it’s a positive thing. However, that isn’t always the case.
For many years graffiti was used as an outlet for gangs to mark their territory, but now they have moved to the Internet. Today, gangs use social media as a way to communicate with one another and plan organized crimes. In a study of five large cities, researchers found that social media is used by 80 percent of gang members (according to Solutions for State and Local Government Technologies).
Not only can gangs send messages via social media, they can also post videos of their crimes, recruit others, and of course threaten other gangs. Today a gang can simply post what they want the public to know to social media. With the vast majority of cellphones having cameras, anyone can be a videographer, and in just a few clicks that video of a crime can be shared with the world.
In addition, gangs use the Internet and social media to monitor where police officers are; they warn each other as well and give each other the all-clear. Another trend gangs use on the West Coast is referred to as “flocking.” This is where a mass text is sent to gang members, telling them to show up at a specific place and conduct an organized crime, according to Government Technologies.
Gangs also send slanderous messages to other gangs via rap song through sites such as YouTube, Facebook, and Twitter. Last fall, videos posted to the web were what led to 18-year-old rapper Lil JoJo’s murder in Chicago, according to Government Technologies.
Public relations professionals usually see social media as a cost effective way to send out a message, and now gangs view it in the same regard. By one person, simply, sharing a status, video or image, it can quickly be seen by thousands.
According to a Daytona Beach Journal, gangs utilizing social media was seen just last week when five boys beat up a 14-year-old, filming the crime and posting it to Facebook. Luckily there was a light at the end of the tunnel for police. The video was used as police evidence and the four boys were arrested.
Though social media has become a tool for gang members, police believe it can help them execute their jobs properly as well. If officers know the ins and outs of how to utilize social media as a tool to catch gang members and criminals, more justice can be served. Unfortunately, officers fear they might not be able to prevent the crimes. For example, in the Florida case, officers were able to find those guilty of the crime because of the video, but they were unable to prevent the crime, itself. The hope is with the proper training, social media will become a more valuable tool for law enforcement than it is for gang members and criminals.
Many times in public relations we are faced with the question: Is this situation a problem or an opportunity? Therefore I will ask you, is the rise of social media use among gangs a problem for police or an opportunity?