I have not kept up with my PR Death Watch series, posts about the changes that have been rocking the PR field, and the dangers of not adapting (the last post about this was in 2010, see Circle of Life in PR).
Part of me feels like the topic has been done. By now, it is pretty obvious how the profession has been changing, and thankfully, more in our field are waking up, adapting and in some ways redefining the job (see my post Innovation is Alive and Well in PR, which references a series that I wrote for Bulldog Reporter about this).
But I saw an article in the NY Times last week that reminded me of the series and made me think that one more PR tool may need rethinking. So why not do one more PR Death Watch post for old time sake!
It was about a carefully staged Romney photo op, anchored by a major policy speech. The location (Ford Field, a 65,000 seat indoor football stadium in Michigan) was important and symbolic given today’s primary and his roots in the state.
By all indications it was a successful event – if you watched it on TV. The cameras showed a large and receptive crowd. However, there was more to the story (exceprt in italics).
Mr. Romney could be seen standing at a lectern in front of a backdrop that had the logo of the Detroit Economic Club, the event’s host. And when the stadium audience of about 1,200 people clapped, they filled the screen as cameras panned across them.
But in the age of Twitter and the Internet, that is not all that matters.
Before Mr. Romney had uttered a word, reporters began posting pictures online showing the stadium from every available angle — almost empty, except for the chairs set up on the field itself, near the 20-yard line.
Does this mean that photo opps are a bad idea? Are they really dead, or should they be? No, just that you need to take into account all views, and lose the blue smoke and mirrors because people will see right thriough them.
That’s a very interesting article and one that all PR folks should read. It appears the days of “fluffing” an event are long over, especially when social media can tell a different story. It also signals to PR folks and campaign managers that the “control” over perception as a result of these photo opps is not as strong as it used to be.