Communicator of the Week: D-Day As It Happens

I love history documentaries but that isn't the reason why I made D-Day As It Happens  my Communicator of the Week. It was for taking a story we all know well and giving it new energy through clever use of multiple media channels.

See the full reasons why at the PR Moment blog here. 

Media tips from a muscle man

I was in my local leisure centre gym recently where one of the sizeable personal training staff was strutting around the gym floor. An intimidating looking gentleman particularly for someone like me of a Sarkozy level of stature. What soon became clear as I cycled away on a spinning bike was how his physicality was an influence on how people reacted to him.

I don't know the guy but in the 20 minutes or so we were both in the gym he seemed to be a likeable gentle giant of a man; greeting everyone he crossed paths with a cheery "alright boss". What was amazing - and the point of this blog - was how people reacted to him.

Some smiled and nodded sheepishly, others said "hi" but the majority responded with exactly the same phrase as our gentle giant had used to greet them - "alright boss".

It struck me that there are parallels to the reaction of these gym users to an intimidating muscle man and the way a lot of people behave when conducting a media interview. When people are nervous and feel a little intimidated by the journalist interviewing them, they are all too often prone to using the same phrases and terminology used by the journalist. As my observation in the gym demonstrated it is human nature to look to build a connection with someone who might be a threat.

There is however a problem with this which is that very often journalists will deliberately use leading questions or certain phraseology in a bid to trip up those they are interviewing.  If you are prepared it is easy to spot and then to avoid. If you are not prepared you will find yourself mirroring the language of the journalist in a way that might be harmful to your, or your organisation's, reputation. So remember the gentle giant and don't do it.

What businesses can learn from French vineyards

A couple of weeks ago I was lucky to be in Burgundy, cycling amongst the vineyards and tasting some of the delicious wine.

Two experiences on consecutive days struck me as the perfect example of how businesses should tell their story to potential customers.

The first was a paid for visit to a chateau with a wine tasting at the end of the visit. All the staff my wife and I met were polite, the wine we tried was superb but the message communicated by these staff and all their promotional material was - I paraphrase - "we make the world's best white wine from the vineyards in and around our historic and beautiful chateau". We weren't asked what we might want the wine for or what we usually drink. There was no attempt to build a connection with us.

Although we liked what we had tasted we decided not to buy any wine as we were cycling but were minded to head back in our car later on the trip.

Now contrast the message this chateau communicated to the experience we had at a small vineyard we visited the next day. The owner, despite arriving unannounced at his lunchtime, shook our hands and was happy to welcome us to his cellar. Each wine we tried he asked us what we thought and then gave his opinion of what foods it could be drunk with or for what occasion. He was giving us the benefits of buying his wine from him.

The clincher for me though was the short story he told us of how he was the fourth generation of his family to run the vineyard. This in itself wouldn't be any different to saying "we make the world's best white wine from the vineyards in and around our historic and beautiful chateau".

It was different however as he talked about their expertise built up over decades, hands on approach to making every bottle in small quantities and the fact they are a small producer meaning they produce brilliant wine at a reasonable price.

So his story became the reason we should buy his wine not merely a summary of who they are. His description of his family business was actually a list of the benefits we would get from giving him our money. It worked; we bought 6 cases.

James Caan failed the authenticity test

Yesterday I listened to Dragons' Den TV star, entrepreneur, businessmen and now government social mobility tsar James Caan speak eloquently as to why he thought parents should not give their children a leg-up when trying to secure their first job.

He put together a sound argument and spoke well during an interview with BBC Radio 4's Today programme - one of the toughest gigs around.

As someone who at school was advised I could work in either one of the banks in town or for a rural estate agency - expanding my horizon was not encouraged - I can see where he was coming from.

Today he is trending on Twitter and the subject of quite a bit of negative coverage after it emerged that he had employed both his daughters. In contrast to yesterday's positive morning media, today he was batting away claims of nepotism and hypocrisy.

In simple terms James Caan was telling us all to do one thing when he himself does something different but in communication terms it is a question of authenticity.

Someone like Caan, who is a self-made millionaire, is exactly the kind of person who should be seen as an inspiration to young people.

When he tells the story about how his parents encouraged him to find his own way in life and how this helped him to succeed he is telling the truth. Or at least the evidence he provides is enough for us to believe what he says. But that isn't enough. His experiences as a young man are overshadowed as his message to parents does not match with his own experience so, in the eyes of the public, he is no longer authentic.

There is a lesson here for anyone wanting to influence people whether in business or politics in that the truth matters but sometimes being seen to be authentic is just as important.

Communicator of the Week: Greg Rutherford

I made Olympic gold medallist Greg Rutherford my Communicator of the Week for the punchy way he was willing to take on mis-information and proactively PR himself.

See more at the PR Moment website.

Communicator of the Week: Eric Schmidt

Today Ed Miliband, the Labour leader, is at Google's HQ in London giving them a talking to about tax avoidance. It sees to have become a political fashion to have a go at companies like Google. 

With this is mind I think the way Google has handled the situation has been pretty good, particularly its willingness to engage in meaningful debate. That is why I made their Chairman, Eric Schmidt, my Communicator of the Week. 

You can see more details as to why on the PR Moment website. 

Has BP read its own mission statement?

The well known oil companies are in the news again for the wrong reasons. Today it has emerged that the BP and Shell offices have been raided as part of a price-fixing investigation.

Companies like these are frequently maligned by environmental groups which fails to dent their profits. This time the news is different. Something as fundamental as the alleged price fixing - if proven or not - will undermine the consumer confidence in these companies. Their reputation will suffer. This is no longer about oil spills in remote places but ripping people off and the £ in their pocket.

This led me to think about the book Rework by Fried and Hansson which includes a chapter about mission statements. They rightly conclude that "standing for something isn't just about writing it down. It's about believing it and living it."

Now let's look at BP's 'Respect' section of their corporate values (my underlining):

We respect the world in which we operate. It begins with compliance with laws and regulations. We hold ourselves to the highest ethical standards and behave in ways that earn the trust of others. We depend on the relationships we have and respect each other and those we work with. We value diversity of people and thought. We care about the consequences of our decisions, large and small, on those around us.

The oil companies have said they are cooperating with the investigation. An ok corporate response to an ongoing investigation. At the same time I would recommend they make sure their actions in all areas of their business match their story, review their mission statements and check they are living these values rather than merely putting them on their websites. 

Mis-Communicator of the Week: Zara Phillips

Preparation for media interviews is essential, as is being ready for the classic "one last question" which can often be where interviewees trip up after allowing themselves to relax too early.

I don't know which of these is to blame for this week's award winner but a significant amount of blame should also be shared with the PR team who didn't do their job properly.

For the full rundown as to why Zara Phillips is my Mis-Communicator of the Week see PR Moment.

Communicator of the Week

We have a very worthy champion for Communicator of the Week. An organisation which has recognised the power of advertising as part of a broader media and communications campaign.

See who has won and why at the PR Moment website.

Mis-Communicator of the Week: Beyonce

I believe we have our first ever winner of both the prestigious Communicator of the Week and the less reputation enhancing Mis-Communicator of the Week awards.

This week I have made Beyonce my Mis-Communicator of the Week as she continues to have a poor year. Admittedly her fans still love her but she is making errors which could be easily avoided. If this run continues it is only a matter of time before the media tide turns against her.

For the full rundown on why she has failed this week go to the PR Moment blog.

Thatcher/Churchill funerals show how UK has changed

Those opposed to the idea of Margaret Thatcher having her funeral at St.Paul's Cathedral looked for similarities with grand send-offs of days gone by such as Sir Winston Churchill's in 1965. The debate over what constituted a State funeral or not rumbled on (Sir Winston's was while Lady Thatcher's was not) however Lady Thatcher's funeral had been agreed years in advance.

The coverage over the week of her death and funeral was wall-to-wall but I was most struck by the pictures on television, and in the newspapers, which illustrated how this country, our capital city and us Brits have changed in the 48 years since Churchill's funeral.

First, London has altered unimaginably. In 1965 the great London docks which the Germans had done so much to try and destroy in the Second World War were still operating. Famously, cranes on the banks of the River Thames were lowered in tribute to Churchill as his body was carried by barge to Waterloo station.

 

The second way we have changed is in how we express our emotions much more freely. At the funeral of Diana, Princess of Wales, in 1997, the outpouring of grief was of the like never before seen in this country. While people's reaction last week to Lady Thatcher's passing coffin was far more muted there is still a telling contrast in behaviour of those lining the route for the funerals of Churchill and Thatcher.

The Guardian reports that at Churchill's funeral "an extraordinary silence that could not be broken even by the bands and the rhythmic feet" fell across the crowds as his coffin processed by. As Lady Thatcher's coffin moved along the route a ripple of applause greeted her as seen in this video from YouTube below:

This is the third way we have changed in that we all chronicle, for ourselves and others, the events we attend whether a funeral or a major sporting occasion using our cameras and smart-phones. 

If we look at the pictures of people lining the route in 1965 we see stern faces stood stoically in sombre remembrance:

In contrast, as the video posted above demonstrates, a majority of people on the route of Thatcher's funeral were there to pay their respects but also capture the experience to share on social media such as Twitter, Facebook or YouTube:

So, for all the similarities the tradition ingrained in these great national occasions there are plenty of ways this country has changed in the last half century too.  

Mis-Communicator of the Week: The BBC

As a believer in free speech even if it offends I found the way the BBC banned the playing of a record last week slightly absurd. So much so I made them my Mis-Communicators of the Week.

Read more on the PR Moment blog.

Italian chefs set the record straight

We've all cooked spaghetti bolognese - or have we? In my kitchen I have dozens of cooking books from Raymond Blanc to Jamie Oliver via Delia and all have done a version of the classic 'spag bol'. Leafing through them it now seems few are even half right in their recipes and are in fact just interpretations of the real thing.

Does this matter? Not really you might think but it does if you are from the Bologna Chamber of Commerce where the world famous dish originates. They were so annoyed at ordering a 'spag bol' and getting a pale imitation that they organised a world-wide day of cooking where 450 Italian chefs in 50 countries followed the recipe approved by the Chamber.

I think this is great. Not only did they fight back at the - admittedly inadvertent - attack on their reputation but they also secured significant worldwide media coverage. A taste - sorry - of it can be seen here.

This was back in 2010. I bet if done today you could ask people to share photos or videos of their attempts at a classic - genuine - spag bol through Facebook, Twitter, Instagram and Pinterest and would get tens of thousands of people involved from Rome to Reykjavik.

    

Communicator of the Week: Angelina Jolie

I have made Angelina Jolie my Communicator of the Week. The way she has reinvented herself as a truly influential advocate against conflict and for women's rights in global politics is extraordinary.

She is an example of how to build a positive reputation and seems to do an awful lot of good at the same time. See this link for more details on why she is my Communicator of the Week. 

Why Ed Miliband's speech worked

Those, like me, who work helping people communicate better will have enjoyed the brilliant speeches delivered this week in memory and appreciation of Margaret Thatcher. Most have relied on personal anecdotes to make a point. This has made them warm speeches, easy to listen to and appreciate. Ed Miliband arguably had the hardest of the speeches to write and deliver this week which is why I believe he deserves praise.

Two and a bit years ago I wrote this blog as analysis of Ed Miliband's first speech as Labour Party leader. In summary I thought it rather poor. Time moves on and, I imagine, so has Miliband's speech writing team from September 2010.

His speech on Wednesday to the House of Commons is worth reading in full here  or you can see it delivered via the Guido Fawkes website here. It reads better than it was delivered as Miliband still needs help with that part of his communication but overall a very good speech.

But why? First it made an argument taking the listener through this argument step by step. This is something ignored all too freely in modern political speeches in a rush for a soundbite. The best speeches aren't afraid to set out an argument with care, treating the listener as an adult, before reaching a conclusion. Ed Miliband achieved this on Wednesday which allowed him to be critical of Margaret Thatcher without being insensitive. 

He also used quotes very well to help develop or illustrate a point. To outline that he disagreed with a lot of what she did he quoted her line, "Politics is more when you have convictions than a matter of multiple manoeuvrings to get you through the problems of the day."

Miliband also used some tried and tested methods of the best speech-writers such as the echo, alliteration and metaphor.  

I liked this passage very much with the word "woman" ringing out as an echo helping to underscore Miliband's generous point: 

"At each stage of her life, she broke the mould. A woman at Oxford when there was not a single woman in the university who held a full professorship. A woman chemist when most people assumed scientists had to be men. A woman candidate for parliament in 1950, against the opposition of some in her local party in Dartford, at the age of only 24. A woman MP in 1959 when just 4% of MPs in the whole of this House were women. The only woman in the cabinet when she was appointed in 1970. And, of course, the first woman prime minister."

Alliteration was missing from Miliband's earlier speeches but I've noticed he has begun to use it as a tool to grab his listeners more and more for example of Wednesday he said simply but effectively "In mining areas, like the one I represent, communities felt angry and abandoned."  

Finally he quoted Thatcher's use of a brilliant metaphor about democracy: "Consensus doesn't give you any direction. It is like mixing all the constituent ingredients together and not coming out with a cake...democracy is about the people being given a choice." 

It was a thoughtful, well crafted speech which made an argument with care and I believe deserves praise because of this. 

Communicator of the Week: Margaret Thatcher

I have made Margaret Thatcher my Communicator of the Week on the PR Moment website available here.

She changed this country with her policies but also altered forever how politics was communicated with many of the techniques she introduced still being used today. Much is made of whether David Cameron is heir to Tony Blair or Margaret Thatcher. Actually both Blair and Cameron are heirs of Thatcher. I believe she should be seen as a PR icon even though she didn't read the papers.

You can read the full blog here.

On a day like today you need to feel the newsprint

In the past week the Daily Telegraph has initiated a paywall to its online content to follow the FT and The Times as national newspapers already doing this. There is no doubt what is on offer on iPads, mobile phones and on websites has improved enormously over the past year so streaming content, great images, info graphics help to deliver amazing additional content to the facts as you would get them in a hard copy newspaper.

There are days however when great journalism seems to need to be read while getting your fingers a little dirty. Today is that day. I happily ran in the spring rain to my local newsagent this morning to pick up a selection of today's newspapers. The death of Margaret Thatcher - whatever your politics - is a significant moment in this nation's history. To accompany this historic event the quality of the writing in our national papers is tremendous, as is the photo journalism to accompany it.

The new Times comment editor, Tim Montgomerie, Tweeted this photo montage of today's front pages:

Some of the best articles worthy of reading are Peter Oborne in the Daily Telegraph, George Osborne in The Times, Max hastings in the Daily Mail and Martin Wolf in the FT. I've provided links here but you'll enjoy them all the more if you get your fingers a little bit dirty with newsprint.

Why social media is all about content

Earlier this afternoon the White House Twitter account posted this picture of President Obama meeting families of victims of gun violence:

It is a simple, powerful image which illustrates why the campaign he is leading to bring in greater controls on guns in America matters. That is not me commenting on the actual policy details as I don't know what these are; it is me commenting on the faces of the two women Obama is hugging. 

I came across it as I skimmed through my Twitter feed and, because there was a picture posted it caught my eye. If the White House had merely posted a link to the speech the President had made the message would have passed me by - increasingly we are all dipping into Twitter and Facebook through our mobile phones - but instead I instantly understood the message the White House wanted to communicate. 

Too few politicians in the UK have yet grasped what social media is for. Spend a short time on Twitter and you can see how politicians of all colours feel a need to comment without thinking or broadcast without engaging. In many ways they are doing themselves more harm than good.

If they really want to use social media as a way to connect they need to think 'CONTENT' in the way Obama's communication team clearly has. 

Last week's Communicator of the Week: The Vatican

When faced with an unprecedented global news event - the last Papal abdication in 1415 doesn't count - it creates a great opportunity to communicate. That said, opportunities can easily be missed, botched or fail to connect with a target audience. 

It is not known how much, if any, warning the PR team at The Vatican had of Pope Benedict's announcement of his imminent abdication. The enormity of the task could easily have become too much resulting in an unfocussed narrative being allowed to form about the Catholic church. Instead the character of the new Pope has been communicated, a new direction for the Catholic Church outlined.    

The nature of the period between Pope Benedict's resignation to the announcement of the new Pope is of secrecy and uncertainness. The Papal Conclave is not a meeting conducive to the 21st century global, integrated news stream. This created further pressure. 

Recognising this the PR team at The Vatican have carefully merged tradition with the modern; every type of communication channel has been utilised. 

As well as the dramatic pictures of Pope Benedict flying by helicopter from The Vatican, Pope Francis has conducted a select few photo-opportunities to keep the TV news content. 

This high-profile work has been carefully supplemented by background briefing to settle in the minds of the faithful the character of Pope Francis. This briefing has included his reasoning of choosing Francis as his name (to honour Francis of Assisi who fought for the poor); tid-bits about the kind of shoes he wears (plain slip-ons not Papal fancy red ones); the news he had checked himself out of his hotel the morning after his election and that he won't let anyone carry his bags.     

Pope Francis himself has embraced Twitter, has uttered a witticism or two in his initial sermons and has kissed babies and the sick in St.Peter's Square as he has shunned the 'Pope Mobile' to go on 'unofficial walkabouts' as they are quietly briefed. 

For all this I make The Vatican my Communicators of the Week.  

A new kind of Budget speech

I have an article published on the ConservativeHome blog about the forthcoming Budget speech. To me Budget day is a wonderful opportunity for the government of the day to communicate to voters. Instead we get a poorly constructed speech which is overly complicated; failing to stick to one consistent theme.  

This is why, to grab the opportunity handed to him, I’d advise George Osborne to construct a very different kind of budget speech; shorter, more focussed on one theme, not trying to be like Gordon Brown, or any previous Chancellor, and instead use the Budget to communicate a message and a plan rather than be seen to tinker.

On the blog I've been attacked by some claiming I'm advocating 'spin' rather than substance. This is the opposite of my advice. With simplicity will come greater understanding, as I say in the article:

"No speech which grabs people can be without substantial policy but, as Ronald Reagan’s speech-writer, Peggy Noonan, says “big things are communicated using small words.” Of course Treasury officials will want to over-complicate things to prove their worth, but this must be resisted. Osborne should insist on brevity to keep us – and him – focussed."

You can read the full article here. 

Communicator of the Week

My Communicator of the Week - after a few weeks of negativity with my column - is relentlessly positive and has communicated something rather remote with flair and imagination. I love how he has taken a subject large and unrelated to our everyday lives and made it real through finding ways to connect with us.

You can see who it is on the PR Moment blog but see below for a clue with this picture of Newcastle-Upon-Tyne:

   

Human stories still the best way to boost reputations

Two great human interest stories today which help to show big organisations in a positive light. Both demonstrate the power of stories to connect and inspire us with both being shared hugely on social media.

The first is about United Airlines in America who delivered exceptional customer service to help a passenger get home to say goodbye to their dying mother. The airline had quite a few individuals who made extra efforts to help the passenger in a moment of real distress as this Sky News story shows. It would be easy for the airline to get their response wrong but the way the United spokeswoman downplayed their involvement, letting the story speak for itself is really class, "Our employees really worked together that day to help this customer" she said simply.

The other story is one closer to home where Transport for London are bringing back a vintage "Mind The Gap" recording, originally made in the 1960s. The importanceofbeingtrivial.com blog has the full story.

In summary, in a strange quirk there was just one platform on the Northern Line where the recording of Peter Lodge's voice still warned passengers of the danger. Elsewhere on the Underground his recordings had long been overtaken by more modern versions. For reasons unknown this last platform recently replaced his recording too. Until TFL got a letter from Tony Lodge's widow saying that after he died she used to go to Embankment tube station just to hear his voice, and now she couldn't. So they decided to put it back for her. 

Both these stories make you feel good about the organisations involved as they have dealt with potentially challenging situations with real empathy and a personal touch. There are lessons for others who may be scrambling around for positive media coverage or an enhanced reputation; how you go about your business is how you will be perceived.  

Why backdrops are important

Yesterday Guido Fawkes blogged about the similarities of the backdrops used by Ed Miliband and then David Cameron for their respective economy speeches delivered in the last two weeks.

See the Labour leader:

Now the Prime Minister:

Clearly there are striking similarities in that they both spoke with a background of light industry and both speeches were about the economy. There are shared failures too. 

I blogged for the PR Moment website about Miliband's speech saying his messages were mixed and the images used to communicate the speech confusing. The top line briefed heavily by Labour was their commitment to reintroduce the 10p tax rate to help low-income workers but his backdrop was an empty workshop. Few watching on TV would have made the connection because there wasn't one.

For the Prime Minister he dismissed calls for tax cuts and insisted that the government would not change direction on the economy. So, like Miliband, Cameron's backdrop didn't fit his message about tax but could arguably be doing the job when it comes to the broader economy point. However, an empty workshop hardly says "we're getting the economy back on track" does it?

Fundamentally neither backdrop was particularly inspiring but at least some thought seems to have been put into them instead of the usual BBC potted plant in their Millbank studios or Ed Miliband's usual bookcase which communicates nothing:

Broadcasters have tried for a long-time to use backdrops to help tell a story - not always for their guests benefit. I was handling the launch of an environmental report a few years ago which included proposals to increase parking charges. An interview had been arranged with a nice green backdrop of a large pond, wildlife and trees to help communicate that this was an environmental report. On arrival the news reporter suggested that the interview be moved to a car park nearby as "they couldn't get a satellite link this far away from the van". This was utter rubbish; what they actually wanted was a backdrop of a car park to illustrate the story they wanted to tell rather than the one I had arranged. 

As the speed of news delivery increases the capacity to deliver a killer soundbite in a 15 second clip will grow. I would love to see these produced in-house on a daily basis by political parties and distributed via social media as well as using the traditional broadcast media channel. What this means is the need to use a good backdrop will increase so expect more 'backdrop wars' in years to come.  

 

Mis-Communicator of the Week: Barminco

I have made mining company Barminco my Mis-Communicators of the week for their terrible creation of a crisis which was entirely of their own making.

Lessons for everyone on how to deal with the Internet and social media. See my full reasons why over at PR Moment website or see it here. 

Mis-Communicator of the Week: Nick Clegg

Nick Clegg is my award winner this week for his woeful handling of the allegations against Lib Dem grandee, Lord Rennard. Clegg's failures are useful lessons for anyone dealing with a crisis situation, to read what these are go over to PR Moment.

A tribute to Peter Spencer

You'll know Peter Spencer - he's the suave, quietly spoken chap on Sky News reporting from Westminster when you go to bed on a Saturday night and again as you rise on a Sunday morning. Never flustered, with a calmness which allows his tremendous use of the English language to shine, he updates the world on the latest goings on in British politics as our political week begins once again.

Sadly his colleague Nial Paterson Tweeted earlier that Peter is to retire. This isn't sad for Peter I hope as he deserves to enjoy his weekends - working weekends in Westminster can be an lonely, thankless task - but it is sad for all of us.

There are still gentlemen and women in journalism; those who are willing to discuss not dictate, build bridges not bully. They do unfortunately seem to get fewer every year. A dozen or so years ago, when I began working in political communication, there were still some old-school giants prowling the Burma Road (as the corridor in the Parliamentary Press Gallery is known) such as George Jones of the Daily Telegraph, David Hughes of the Daily Mail, Trevor Kavanagh of The Sun. As journalism as a trade has changed through increased speed, additional pressures on journalists and changes in culture so those plying the trade have changed too.

Beyond politics - indeed beyond the UK too, this isn't an attack on the current crop of Lobby journalists - it is rare to come across journalists with an openness and fairness still seen with the way Peter Spencer went about his work.  

I have some very warm memories of Peter when he showed immense kindness to me that I will never forget. He didn't need to, his act, though a simple one, didn't make his job of delivering his political two-ways easier, but is a measure of the man that he wanted to.

My favourite moment from Peter was while he was conducting a political two-way a few years ago. As he took the bleary-eyed viewers through the latest in Westminster his phone began to ring. His ring tone? Befitting of a man who drove a pink BMW with the number plate BARBIE it was Aqua's number one "I'm a Barbie Girl in a Barbie World". Ever the professional, as the tune grew louder, he continued with his two-way while reaching into his pocket and calmly turning his phone to silent. All done with a twinkle in his eye.

After well over 30 years in Fleet Street and on television Peter Spencer is retiring and will be sorely missed.   

Mis-Communicator of the Week

My Mis-Communicator of the Week can now be found here on the PR Moment website.

It is someone who said one thing but the pictures they supplied to communicate their story didn't back up their message. When 55 per cent of what is communicated is through body language and the overall image we see that is a big error.

'Kate Middleton', Google and modern journalism

The row over Hilary Mantel's lecture where, it is claimed, she launched a venomous attack  on The Duchess of Cambridge has highlighted the constant mis-reporting by British and foreign media of Her Royal Highness. The mis-reporting comes in referring to her as 'Kate Middleton'.

For reference, there is a guide to styles and titles on the UK monarchy website which is much more reliable than Google or Wikipedia and The Duchess of Cambridge's is here.   

As I occasionally do, I tweeted that her name is NOT Kate Middleton - remember the big wedding we all got excited about - in the hope that it might make some difference. I was disappointed to receive two tweets in return from Lobby corespondents who are normally sticklers for accuracy. One, Rob Merrick, saying in capital letters that "IT DOES NOT MATTER" and the second, Rob Hutton, a man of almost obsessive eye-for-detail, "I learned last year that if you tweet 'Duchess of Cambridge is pregnant', no one knows whom you mean."

Even David Cameron in a mis-guided intervention called her by her maiden name. To be fair to the Prime Minister so did Ed Miliband who said "Kate Middleton is doing a brilliant job." The problem is that even those newspapers who have editorial guidelines on use of titles and names - basically the broadsheets - still have to play the game of search engine optimisation (SEO). This is where the copy posted to the web is optimised to make it appear higher up the search rankings through Google or another search engine. The result is that even publications like The Telegraph, who refer to Catherine as The Duchess of Cambridge see here also make sure that the story includes the words 'Kate Middleton' a number of times and also make it the first term in the URL -web link - for the story.

The obsession with getting the search engine optimisation correct leads to weird schizophrenic pieces of journalism like this in the Evening Standard where Catherine is called The Duchess of Cambridge in one paragraph and Kate Middleton the next. The Huffington Post piled in with a vacuous list article Hilary Mantel and 10 reasons why she may be right about Kate Middleton.

So who is to blame? Google has its algorithm and every year produces a list of the most popular search terms of the previous twelve months. In 2012 the 'Google Zeitgeist' had 'Kate Middleton' at the number two search term in the UK. So it would be easy to argue that newspapers, reliant on web traffic to entice advertisers to their sites, are merely providing the content which will get noticed by the search engines. But isn't it actually the case that people put into search engines terms they know are going to be successful? Google conducts a search and out pops the content that a journalist has already written.

It is a chicken and egg conundrum which is likely to remain unresolved meaning I will continue sending out pleading tweets which will be ignored. Undoubtedly of greater importance is the way that journalism has changed, along with editorial policy, so accuracy is reduced in the continued hunt for that modern-day nirvana: number one place on the first page of a Google search.      

Ronald Reagan delivers alternative State of Union - in 1964

President Obama delivered his first State of the Union speech last night since being re-elected. Then, this morning, as I was reviewing famous speeches for a training course I am preparing, I came across a powerful campaign speech from Ronald Reagan delivered in 1964 in support of the then Republican Presidential candidate Barry Goldwater.

What is amazing is that Reagan and Obama cover much of the same ground and Reagan's speech - substituting names of individuals and countries, updating facts - could have been delivered by Mitt Romney as his stump speech.

Apart from the fact this is a great example of speech writing and speech making it is worth a look to see how the personnel in politics change but the issues remain the same:

 

Communicator of the Week

This week I have awarded the Communicator of the Week prize to an MP who delivered an outstanding speech in support of equal marriage. They told a personal story to make an impact and showed real passion for a cause they believe in.

Go to PR Moment or click here to find out who he is.

It isn't a shock that sportsmen cheat

The news today of widespread drug use involving scientists, coaches and players in Australia has been labelled as 'shocking'.  I couldn't agree less. It is a widely held belief - backed up by more than a few rumours regarding some - that top sports stars in the UK are just as guilty.

What I do agree with is this report in the Sydney Morning Herald which says the report "points the finger of blame" at the administrators of the sports. For too long sports all around the world - which are multi-million dollar/pound/euro businesses are run as if we are still in the amateur era. The result: none are willing to take responsibility and get their house in order. Many draw comfort that a scandal of the magnitude of Lance Armstrong hasn't happened to them. Yet.

Some may say that the disclosures are too vague and now leaves a shadow over all of Australian sport. For a country where sport and competing is at the heart of their national identity let us hope this isn't the case. Instead the authorities need to take firm, rapid action and follow up on their initial ground-breaking investigation. Sponsors should reward those sports that embrace change and transparency.

It should now be the turn of other countries to follow the lead set by Australia. They have been brave and should be commended for it. This isn't merely a few individuals less willing to work hard to make the most of their talents but criminal activity of huge proportions. If it is happening in Australia it is happening in the UK too.

Communicator of the Week

I have made the professional cycling team, Team Sky, my Communicators of the Week. Yes, I am a huge cycling fan but there are very valid reasons why they have won my prestigous award.

Very happily I can announce that Communicator of the Week has a new home. From today is can be found at prmoment.com and this week's award giving column is here.

Want to win an argument? Tell a story

Followers of politics will be aware of various rows which have rumbled on over the past week concerning some ill-advised portrayals of Israel and Jews.

Last week, ahead of Holocaust Memorial Day, Lib Dem MP David Ward alleged that the Jews hadn’t learnt the lesson of the Holocaust. On Holocaust Memorial Day itself The Sunday Times published a misguided cartoon by Gerald Scarfe  depicting Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu building a brick wall containing the blood and limbs of Palestinians. The paper's editor Martin Ivens has - following the lead of owner Rupert Murdoch - apologised.

Normally these kind of rows of left v right, party v party, lobby group versus lobby group morph into a tit-for-tat "you would say that wouldn't you" kind of impermeable barrier which exclude outsiders from understanding what is actually being debated. This morning The Times columnist Danny Finkelstein has written a piece entitled Lessons from the Holocaust? Try these two which deals with both these slurs.

Twitter users have been quick to share around the Finkelstein piece saying it is a "must read". I agree, and did the same, but why?

Finkelstein is a very clever and adept writer which allows him to communicate his arguments through frequent use of examples and, more often than not, vivid storytelling. Instead of getting caught up in the mire of Israeli-Palestinian relations (the tit-for-tat) he rises above this through telling one, awful, true story about his family and their treatment by the Nazis.   

This shows the power of storytelling to make a point, grab attention and persuade others of the merits of your arguments. What Finkelstein does is humanise the debate by talking of his grandmother, his Mum and her sisters. By doing this we make a connection with him and his argument, understand his point and emphasise with it.

There is much more on storytelling in Gavin Esler's excellent book 'Lessons from the Top: How Successful Leaders Tell Stories to Get Ahead'  which I recommend for anyone wanting to write or communicate better.      

Communicator of the Week

When your business is attacked in one of the UK's best selling and most influential tabloid newspapers what should you do? I would argue never - as too many who have faced this situation have - do nothing and if sure of your facts get on the front foot.

When glamour model and celebrity publicity hound Katie Price wrote her column in The Sun attacking Sandals resorts of being more like a smelly old flip-flop after holding her wedding and honeymoon at one of their resorts, the travel company could have seen their reputation severely damaged.

Instead they took these three steps:

Refuted untruths 
Ever classy Price complained about the lack of exclusivity of the Sandals resort but the firm responded in detail by saying they'd offered her "use of the resort’s private offshore island, Sandals Cay, for her wedding ceremony and the duration of her stay. However, Ms Price declined this offer, and against the Sandals team’s advice opted instead to hold the ceremony on the public beach where she was photographed by paparazzi." This is clever as it not only rebuts but undermines Katie Price's attack as well as communicating positive messages about the Sandals experience. 

Grabbed the opportunity

Price further alleged that a butler had asked if she was a porn star. In response Sandals brilliantly outlined a number of the selling points of their butler service who are all trained by the “Guild of Professional English Butlers”. A further brilliant example that every interaction with the media is an opportunity to communicate positively. 

Used knowledge of media to get results 

Finally the PR team knew how to fight back against negative coverage in The Sun - brief one of their biggest rivals. The Daily Mail were only too happy to dismiss the claims Price had made in The Sun at length and you can read the full statement from Sandals on the Daily Mail website.   The Daily Mail were even good enough to publish picture postcard scenes of the Sandals resort as a further way to undermine Price's attack:

All of this makes Sandals my Communicator of the Week.

Football is in crisis

I have written frequently on here and on Twitter about the reputational challenge facing football. Racism, vile chants, violence (admittedly not at the level thankfully of the 1980s), general poor behaviour and an over-hyping of the game are undermining the sport.

Paul Hayward in today's Daily Telegraph has written what I reckon is the best, most passionate, summary of the state of the game. He is a deeply experienced journalist who has witnessed the soap opera football offers for many years. I recommend the piece which you can read here .

  

Mis-Communicator of the Week: Gary Lineker and the Match of the Day team

Let me start with an admission: I watch Match of the Day (MotD) almost every Saturday night during the football season. It is an institution in my life as it is for a great many other people in this country. I’ve watched Match of the Day for as long as I can remember and even recollect the Friday night live games that were aired in the 1980s. That said, the show and its presenters are simply not delivering to an acceptable standard one would expect in 2012.
 
If like I am, you are a cricket fan, you will appreciate the gulf in quality of the analysis offered to viewers of coverage of Test Match cricket compared to what we were subjected to on Saturday night. Where cricket coverage might deliver examples and stories from former players mixed with analysis via footage coupled with computer technology and informative graphics, MotD seems wedded to uninteresting banter devoid of any analysis to inform the viewer.

Why have a panel of ex and current players if they don’t tell you something you know already? They don’t have to be slick in their presentation but consistently provide new and insightful information to the viewer undermines what MotD should be all about in the 21^st century. Any football fan can access live or recorded action, commentary and reports of matches from a plethora or sources which means MotD needs to raise its game.

In a world where there is tremendous digital and computer technology to assist us all in the simplest of tasks why is more not made of this by the MotD team? Most websites now use streaming media, brilliant photography and infographics to entertain and inform but MotD seems to have been left in the analogue era. Gary Lineker himself took to Twitter earlier this week to defend MotD – that’s good communication by the way – but relied on an argument that him and the panel only have roughly 2 minutes to spend on each game they show. If that is the case then clever use of graphics and statistics to illustrate the point being made will make analysis easier to produce and communicate to the viewer. It will also make far more compelling television.

Football, indeed all major sports, is now inhabited by number crunchers and stats men to reduce uncertainty in the game and increase the probability of success. Why can’t those of us who tune in to Match of the Day every Saturday get real analysis based on facts? Unfortunately instead we get bad shirts, worse haircuts and matey banter in its place which is why Gary Lineker and the Match of the Day team are my Mis-Communicators of the Week.

Mis-Communicator of the Week: George Entwistle

Many journalists dismiss people like me who offer media training services to our clients. I’ve spoken to some news presenters and reporters who bemoan the fact that, when faced with someone who has been competently trained, they are unable to “get the story I wanted”. On Saturday morning veteran BBC journalist John Humphrey’s seemed to get the story and result he wanted after a saying to the then BBC director-general, George Entwistle, “you should go, shouldn’t you?”

One should be fair to the BBC staffers who grilled their – at the time at least - ultimate boss when he was facing dire accusations of incompetence about the BBC’s editorial performance. That said, although the tone of the questions aimed at Mr Entwistle was firm the actual content of the questions could have been easily predicted in advance. Arguably, if he had handled these interviews better, particularly the interview on the Today programme which is such a strong agenda setter in the political-media world, Entwistle would still be the BBC director-general today. That he did not illustrates the importance of performing well in every interview and seizing that opportunity to get your message across.

When frequently asked by clients what one tip I would give anyone appearing on TV or radio my answer is simply one word: preparation. Entwistle came over as someone who had given in the fight on Saturday morning, this may have been the case or, more likely, he gave that impression by being so ill-prepared for the interviews he gave. This is unforgivable but the most common mistake people make, even those who have a long and distinguished career in television like the former BBC boss.

Those journalists who dislike politicians who are well prepared for interviews should recognise that this is a professional approach to agreeing to such an opportunity. In my experience the very best media performers are those who practice the most and know what they are going to say before they get in front of the camera or microphone. George Entwistle failed in his duty to positively represent the BBC, explain the steps he was taking to protect the reputation of this institution or communicate a message of competence. For this he is my Mis-Communicator of the Week.

Mis-Communicator of the Week: Nadine Dorries

Politicians are having to find new ways to connect with voters, to show that they are accessible and accountable in a way they never have before. Despite British politicians, and our political system more generally, being among the least corrupt or corruptible in the world there is a relentless pressure for our MPs in particular to go further in demonstrating they are “just like you or I” and not “on the take”. Many have taken to Twitter to engage with voters, their opponents and third party groups or Facebook to share photos of the endless fetes and charity events they attend during their frequently seven-day working week. This pursuit of total transparency has reached a new high/low now that Nadine Dorries has decided to go further and – one presumes based on previous editions of the programme – allow millions of voters to see her in a bikini while eating the genitals of a kangaroo.    

Her reason to appear of ITV’s ‘I’m a Celebrity Get Me Out of Here’ is, she says because she is looking forward to “lively, heated debates” about the abortion time limit around the campfire.

I don’t think voters will particularly care that she hadn’t informed her Whips before jetting off to the Australian sunshine – loyal Conservatives will however. What is more important at a time when public distrust with our political class is at an all-time high is that she will not be seen to be working hard for her constituents. By this I don’t mean that any politician needs to be cemented to either Westminster or their constituency every day of the year but a consistent visibility in both arenas is important. As is being available to fight for your constituents if and when they need you. Dorries may be an extremely hard-working MP, she certainly comes over as someone caring and diligent, but this has been destroyed by her decision to go on the programme.   

Ms Dorries has a brilliant gift for grabbing publicity which far too few in the Conservative Party are able. She has an eye for a sound bite, is good – if sometimes a touch over-bearing – on TV, and isn’t afraid to speak her mind. When she wants to she can grip an issue and give it wings in the media and Westminster. There are real issues this country faces which need a great deal of thought, effort, time and energy applied to them. This cannot be done while sat around a campfire talking about abortion.

 

From an MP who delighted in referring to the Prime Minister and Chancellor as “two posh boys” while alleging that they were “out of touch” the irony is too much and is why Nadine Dorries is my Mis-Communicator of the Week.  

Obama's victory certain in 2010

Almost exactly two years ago I wrote a post you can read here saying I was off to the bookies to vote on Barack Obama winning a second term. I outlined that many would begin to write off Obama - including to their peril the Republican Party.

Specifically I said:

"Things are looking pretty bleak only two years into his presidency. The last CNN poll before yesterday's voting had Obama's approval rating at below 50 per cent. While 56 per cent thought he didn't have the right priorities for the country. The same poll showed that nearly half those questioned thought Obama's administration to be too liberal. 53 per cent thought his government was trying to do too much."

I then outlined how, by holding a majority in the House of Representatives, Republicans would try to force Obama to change course but that, if handled the right way, President Obama would be helped by their political manoeuvrings. 

Specifically I predicted that "by altering course, just slightly, Obama will be able to say he has listened to the people. On big government, much of the stimulus package hated by many on the right is enshrined in law and trickling through. This means that, however much the Republicans want to reduce the size of the state, it will take time to do. In the meantime, particularly the big infrastructure projects will - if Obama's economics are correct - finally start to make a difference to real people on the ground."

This has all happened but arguably something as significant over that two year period has been the way the Republican Party has conducted itself. The polling then, as now, illustrated how voters want to see their political leaders working together for the good of the country. This is particularly true for soft Republic/Democrats and Independents. It was these voters that decided the election last night. They may have remained soft, swing voters over these past two years but that in itself was a victory for the way Obama has governed. They could have very easily deserted him but they were willing to give him another chance. The Republicans on their part failed to offer an attractive alternative.

In November 2010 Obama did enough in change course - or at least looking as if he were trying - to work with both Houses of Congress while, at the same time, the Republicans followed through on their campaign promise of being a road block to cross party consensus. This allowed Obama to position himself right in the centre where modern elections are won. The Republican Party meanwhile had to endure a bruising nomination process where they left the centre ground only for Mitt Romney to tack back in that direction over the past two months. By then it was too late.

In November 2010 I said that the majority of moderate Americans were only just outside Obama's grasp and that, with a slight adjustment from White House strategists on message and message delivery, and a helping hand from Republicans, expect Obama to be victorious in 2012. That is exactly what happened.   

Policing the policy groups

The kerfuffle surrounding the review by Lord Heseltine  reminded me of the time I was handed the poisoned chalice of taking charge of communicating the policy groups set up by David Cameron in the first days of his leadership. Working alongside Oliver Letwin I was tasked with reviewing every word of each review to, in the words of Cameron, "make sure there are no bombs which might go off".

Setting up policy groups has become the norm by opposition politicians in the UK as a way to keep the media off their backs for the first few years of a Parliament. When the inevitable question is pondered about a position on Trident/nuclear power/welfare reform or any other pressing, nationally important, question one can breezily answer that it is part of the policy review. Labour under Ed Miliband has done exactly the same thing.  

Damian McBride, in his insightful blog, has written about 'the election that never was' concentrating on the internal rows of Gordon Brown's Labour government. Things were equally tense in the Conservative Party. 

From 2005 I'd spent two years working alongside George Osborne finding as many different ways to undermine Brown and position him as yesterday's man prior to his making the transition from Chancellor to Prime Minister. All our internal polling showed we had been pretty successful; there was no real appetite for a Brown premiership. In reality, when he did take over at Number 10, good luck coupled with a well planned onslaught of announcements, backed up by the British good-natured attitude to 'give him a chance', resulted in what was soon gleefully described to me by hacks from the Daily Telegraph to the Guardian as "the Brown bounce". 

Externally all at CCHQ tried to communicate a sense of calm: "we always knew his polling numbers would move up", "the election is a long way off, it's fine". However, the election could have been only months away. 

That was how I found myself having daily meetings to "shape" the policy groups. The problem: they didn't want to be "shaped". The six policy groups were tasked with delivering genuine new ideas on the economy, social justice, public services, global poverty, quality of life, national and international security. They were chaired by a formidable list of former cabinet ministers and experts in their fields: Stephen Dorrell (Public Services); John Redwood (Economic Competitiveness); Dame Pauline Neville-Jones (National and International Security); John Gummer with Zac Goldsmith (Quality of Life); Peter Lilley (Globalisation and Global Poverty); and Iain Duncan Smith (Social Justice). Not exactly the most shy and retiring group of people to hammer out details over policy with. Thank goodness the ever indefatigable, habitually good-natured and immensely intelligent Oliver Letwin was tasked with pulling every strand of every policy group together. 

My days were spent reading new chapters of the various reports, drafting up memos where I highlighted any areas of concern to Cameron, Osborne and Letwin, and meeting with the policy group secretariat to discuss our, sometimes conflicting views. It was an immense challenge moving from health to foreign aid to the economy and back to health over the course of one day while trying to keep up with Oliver's ferocious appetite to devour detail in seconds. For every 'out of the box' policy idea all I saw was a negative headline in the Daily Mail. Oliver, ever the optimist, was determined that as much of the original thinking should remain in the documents even if the language had to be considerably re-drafted. All the time this process was on-going the General Election of 2007 was creeping nearer. 

In the space of roughly three months all the policy groups - plus the huge range of sub-groups - delivered their findings, published their reports and a Conservative manifesto was drafted in anticipation for the Autumn poll. Most of the good policy was ignored by the media while any area which could cause consternation with voters was seized upon. I felt for those who had toiled for months to produce original thinking only to see it either attacked by the media, shunned by the party or lambasted by the Labour Party. Within CCHQ however this process had calmed nerves and a new determination was forming that we were, sort of, ready for an election despite only roughly half of seats having Conservative candidates in place.  

Relations between the groups and the party leadership became strained but there was one moment of class from Zac Goldsmith. Despite spending a terribly stressful week rushing his report to the finish line - including having conference calls with Oliver and myself at 2am on two consecutive nights- when all was said and done I received a personal note of thanks for my patience.  

So what lessons have been learnt from this process? Looking at the Heseltine report's coverage little seems to have changed. While the Conservative Business and Treasury teams may find much in the report they like, the focus in the media reporting was on where disagreements have formed. It may be that the same process I was involved in happened again with this report. It also appeared that a certain amount of expectation management had been deployed by the Treasury while Heseltine himself tried manfully to talk up areas of agreement. 

While I don't wish the role I had in the summer of 2005 on anyone, as a Conservative I am very much looking forward to the Labour Party policy review reporting. Is it not ready yet chaps, you've certainly had long enough? 

Communicator of the Week: Michael Bloomberg

As ‘superstorm’ Sandy edged its way towards the East coast of the United States politics was set aside with President Obama and his challenger Mitt Romney suspending their campaigns. That hasn’t meant that politicians have disappeared from our TV screens. Since then – in the hours preceding the storm making landfall and since dawn broke to reveal the devastation -  President Obama, Mayor Bloomberg of New York and Governor Chris Christie of New Jersey have all held press briefings to varying degrees of success.

President Obama - perhaps conscious that Sandy could swing the election his way if dealt with well but minded that failure from the Federal government could do the opposite – held a low key media briefing where the President failed to communicate any urgency or the seriousness of the situation. Indeed, most of comments seemed to be designed to deflect attention away from the preparations being made by the Federal government to those of the State administrations. If this was expectation management it seemed deeply cynical to me. At the same time Obama was hesitant – almost rambling in his words - and somewhat unfocussed on the task at hand.     

By contrast the standout performance so far has come from Mayor Michael Bloomberg. Prior to the storm hitting he gave clear, direct advice delivered in plain and simple language as to what his emergency teams were doing and what the public could do to keep out of harm’s way. He updated the media frequently to ensure that no accusations of lack of action could be levelled at him but never fell into the trap of speculating about subjects he knew nothing about. He has avoided cliché and jargon while communicating great empathy with New Yorkers in a way President Obama failed to do. For this I make Mayor Michael Bloomberg my Communicator of the Week.

Mis-Communicator of the Week: Andrew Mitchell

“Do you know who I am?” The classic line from someone perhaps less than confident in their position in the world or someone more confident than they should be. This is the basic foundation of what it is the Conservative Chief Whip, Andrew Mitchell, is alleged to have said to police officers guarding Downing Street last week. What has been reported of the incident is so littered with expletives and colourful use of the English language that it could have come straight out of a scene from The Thick of It.

Frankly, a cabinet Minister talking down to police guarding Downing Street is enough to win this week’s award in itself, but the way the story has been handled by Mitchell scores him even higher marks. His initial response to the allegations published in The Sun was sufficiently weak and ambiguous that it soon attracted the attention of the Police Federation who are eager to have a battle with the government over cuts to their budgets. This meant there was a new element to the story and additional voices to push the story on without Mitchell killing it once and for all.

If the political correspondents of the Lobby are having fun they aren’t going to stop digging. Sometimes the joy felt by journalists of keeping a story going is itself enough to do just that. A millionaire Conservative cabinet minister allegedly calling police “plebs” is just too delicious for the Lobby to ignore. I make a sad prediction that the Mitchell “Gategate” story will make more column inches than the shocking murders of two police officers in Manchester last week. It goes without saying that this isn’t right but does illustrate why Mitchell needed to act and shut this story down to prevent it continuing over the weekend, into its second political news week.

His further apology on Monday morning got everything right apart from the actual content. He turned up in a Volkswagen Polo not a ministerial Jaguar – important imagery - then proceeded to make his statement before saying he had work to do and entering the Cabinet Office building. It was a perfectly executed, pre-arranged, doorstep interview but unfortunately for Mitchell he forgot to say anything of note. He failed to clarify exactly what was said. It was nuanced in the extreme and merely repeated an apology which had already been made. It has been described as a non-denial denial and failed to address what it was he actually did say, one assumes because he is now so embarrassed about his words.

Clearly Andrew Mitchell said something which was deemed abusive or we wouldn’t still be talking about it. That in itself is enough to make him my Mis-Communicator of the Week. The continuing shambles of an apology is just making it all far worse.

Communicators of the Week

I've made the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge my Communicators of the Week, see why at Dale & Co.

Putin is mad as well as bad

Just how utterly bonkers a photo-opportunity can Vladimir Putin and his team come up with next? I wrote a couple of years ago about his antics which have included swimming in ice cold water, shooting wild animals, saving animals, flying a fighter jet, fishing, practising judo while stripped to the waste and much more. Roughly a year ago I awarded him a tongue in cheek Communicator of the Week award.

Now he has topped it all by flying a motorised hang glider - while dressed as a bird - in a bid to lead a rare breed of Siberian cranes on their migration. If this were a plot in The Thick of It we would all say Armando Iannucci had gone too far. David Cameron has been ridiculed for a photo op with huskies, at least he didn't dress up as one.

I don't know what Putin's communications team are on but it isn't vodka:

Putin dressed as a bird (that'll fox 'em)

 

Putin dressed as a white bird looking at a brown bird...

 

No head of state's media team can ever hope to exceed the creativeness of these photo opportunities. Or would ever want to.   

 

Reshuffle for a new chapter

I have an article published on the reshuffle at The Commentator. I have been reading thoughts, blogs and comment on this site more and more as it goes from strength to strength.

I therefore very pleased my article looking at where the reshuffle moves the political "narrative" has been published here.

Why Clint didn't make my day

The best public speakers throughout history share one thing in common: they all spent an enormous amount of time preparing and practicing their speeches and presentations. Winston Churchill is well-known to have invested huge amounts of time in his speeches; meticulous preparation taking many hours even during the most difficult months of World War Two. Similarly, Abraham Lincoln’s reputation was built upon delivering interesting, often inspirational, speeches – some lasting hours – which took him from small town lawyer to the White House. A modern example might be Steve Jobs who delivered brilliant presentations which seemed informal and ad-libbed but were the result of weeks of work.
 
Perhaps someone should have told Clint Eastwood before he walked on stage at the Republican convention to introduce Mitt Romney that, as with the finest stand-up comics, the best improvisations are rarely improvised. Eastwood, an all-American hero, was a great choice to speak immediately before Romney. He has gravitas from his on-screen roles and brilliant career while appealing to blue-collar workers who Romney has so-far failed to connect with.

Unfortunately Eastwood’s performance was far from Oscar winning, drawing ridicule from many and detracting from Mitt Romney’s own speech. Eastwood was rambling, unfocussed and didn’t deliver something which matched the occasion. He was off message and his lack of structure made it even harder for his audience to follow the arguments he did make.

There are lessons here for anyone giving speeches. Brevity comes with working on a text and honing it down, finessing and tweaking. As Mark Twain said, “I am sorry for such a long letter. I didn’t have time to write a short one.” Always know the purpose of your speech, your key messages, audience and time allocation. Ask yourself whether your speech meets your purpose. Clint Eastwood’s certainly didn’t, which is why he is my Mis-Communicator of the Week.

Communicator of the Week

Sometimes it takes a huge sacrifice from an individual to grab the world’s attention. Without this sacrifice their aims or cause would, in all likelihood, never have received any attention at all. This is true in the case of Tony Nicklinson who died last week after a long and public campaign to legalise assisted suicide.

Mr Nicklinson wasn’t the usual suspect to lead a public, media led, campaign aimed at changing perceptions. Instead of a well groomed individual who eloquently put over their campaign messages via the 24 hour news media Mr Nicklinson, who suffered from ‘locked-in syndrome’ after a life-changing stroke couldn’t even speak. Instead Mr Nicklinson communicated by using a retina scanner to write out his thoughts on a computer. This didn’t detract from the heart-felt anger and injustice he felt or his determination to change the law in this country. He became a frequent figure on the news – his utter frustration plain for all to see.

This once fit, healthy man could have chosen to hide away from the world but instead recognised that the state he was in after the awful stroke was as powerful a message to those he wanted to influence as any words he could have written. His lawyer said after his death that he was a “gutsy, determined fighter to the end”. Sadly he died dejected after the courts ruled against him. He couldn’t fight any longer but I have little doubt his impact on this sensitive area of the law will be long-lasting because he was willing to sacrifice a lot of his pride to get his point across.

For this I make Tony Nicklinson my Communicator of the Week.

Why War on Women will decide US election

In America the Republican party is not having a good summer. While Mitt Romney's pick of vice presidential running mate, Paul Ryan, has motivated the grassroots it is uncertain whether Ryan will help secure the White House. Recent polls are mixed in key swing states. The hoped for bounce hasn't materialised.

What may end up even more significant in deciding the election is the role of women. After Republican congressman Todd Akin's botched TV interview on Sunday, when he said that a woman's body is capable of preventing pregnancy in cases of "legitimate rape", the Democrats have scented blood.

Whoever coined the phrase "War on Women" to apply to Republican politics may have won Obama a second term despite American's luke warm feelings toward him. Type into Google "War on Women" and a cascade of terrible coverage for the Republicans arrives. There is even a website Stop the War on Women with a powerful call to action for women to sign up against what is described as "Republican policies".

In any election there are rows which come and go, many seeming like game-changers which then descend into little more than footnotes when the campaign history is written. War on Women, in my opinion, is a game-changer for three reasons:

1.  In the past 5 US presidential elections women were more likely to vote for the Democrat candidate and also much more likley to approve of the performance of Bill Clinton as president (despite Monica). Therefore it can be assumed Romney already had a mission on his hands to win over women voters. With this election assumed to be won or lost by soft party-aligned voters and neutrals this historical data signals War on Women to be a row which will disproportionally help Obama.

2. Women are more likely to vote. The Centre for American Women and Politics states "Women, who constitute more than half the population, have cast between four and seven million more votes than men in recent elections. In every presidential election since 1980, the proportion [of] female adults who voted has exceeded the proportion of made adults who voted."

3. War on Women is catchy. It is easy to fit into almost any 7-15 second soundbite. It is all encompassing - or I bet it will be by the end of August when Democrats find numerous "examples" of why Republican policies don't help women. It is already being repeated by third party sources such as journalists and commentators meaning it will begin to stick in the public consciousness.

How will Romney and the Republicans fight back? In my mind it is already too late.

Communicator of the Week

How do MPs and others in public life counter the all to common claim that they are "out of touch"? Indeed, despite most MPs, of all political parties, working hard and spending endless hours attending summer fetes and Christmas carol concerts too many fail to connect with their constituents and are seen to be "in it for themselves". In times of austerity these assumptions seem to grow.

The days when MPs could happily survive on making an annual visit to their constituency are thankfully in the past. The days of unbending acquiescence to an individual's right to be a constituency MP for life has also largely disappeared. Still, while barriers between constituents and MPs have reduced considerably in recent years safe seats still exist where sitting MPs could do very little to communicate with voters for years but re-election remains guaranteed.

So it was refreshing to see an MP go all out to demonstrate their commitment to their seat over the weekend. The best way for politicians to demonstrate they are in touch with their electorate is to spend time with them and, even better, actually experience something of their lives. This is what Matthew Hancock, MP for West Suffolk, did by spending the last few months training to ride a horse in a race at Newmarket on Saturday.

The Conservative MP lost more than two stone, exercised for hours every day and needed to pass the horse racing equivalent of the driving test before he was allowed to race. Newmarket, and the constituency as a whole, is an important centre for the horse racing industry so Hancock's commitment to his endeavours will be greatly appreciated.

His commitment to the race - which also raised thousands for charitable causes - was such that he won by a good few lengths further demonstrating the Conservative commitment to First Past the Post. His win has won him admirers from the industry and beyond due to the favourable coverage it has received. Hancock, since being elected in 2010, has been a firm supporter of the racing industry but surely, after living the life of a jockey, if only for a few months, he will be able to represent his constituency in a way very few of his colleagues can ever hope to. For this I make Matthew Hancock my Communicator of the Week.