On one side are those who feel that Councillors communicating with their residents, whether it is during a council meeting or not, is fine. They feel Councillors shouldn’t be held back from letting people know what is going on during the meetings.

On the other side, there are those who feel that tweeting during council meetings is a distraction and keeps the Councillor from paying the kind of attention that is required.

This is a conversation that is happening all around the world. In fact, Council members in the UK found themselves in the midst of controversy when they were caught tweeting during a council meeting that was discussing Councillors allowances. Of course, elsewhere in the UK, the tweets of Councillors were winning praises.

With such a divide, what’s a Councillor to do? I put the question to local Councillors and the Mayor. The responses I got varied, with some choosing not to respond. I also received feedback from the twitter community. I have edited the responses for brevity when necessary.

Hmmm. Tough to answer in 140 characters or less. I don’t have a major issue with it if they’re paying attention, and not leaking info. – Brian Botterill – Ward 3 (@bb4ward3)

… a Tweet…it is a distraction and not appropriate behaviour when you are actively engaged in making decisions on behalf of your constituents. – Roxanne Carr, Ward 2 – @councillorcarr

Yes to tweets during breaks. It is a welcome change in focus during a long day-like a conversation instead of a performance. – Jacquie Fenske – Ward 5 (@jacquiefenske)

No we shouldn’t be. Only during breaks/recess. – Jason Gariepy, Ward 8 (@Jasongariepy)

Elected officials need to concentrate on the matters at hand during that meeting – no matter how boring or contentious. That means reducing distractions as much as reasonable… I don’t think politicians should tweet (or post facebook updates, blog entries, etc) during those meetings. Go ahead and tweet during breaks. – Ian McCormack (@Ian_mccor)

I like council meeting tweeting. I prefer tweeting to be done by third party, not someone paid by gov’t. – Mike Engbers (@mengbers)

Not sure the #yegcc (Edmonton City Council) folks have time to tweet and do council… but if they do, why not? – Gary (@commonsensesoc)

No. They need to focus on their job and not have tweeting as a distraction. After or before is fine. – Brittney Timperley (@BTimps)

YES! – Katy Plesuk (@KatyPlesuk)

So what advice would I give a councillor if I had one as a client? I would suggest that if they want to tweet to make sure they only tweet during breaks and make it very clear that they are not in an active council meeting. Although they might innocently tweet during a break, if their audience doesn’t realize that is what is going on, it won’t matter. Those who want to know their councillor is paying attention will assume they aren’t. Unfortunately, perception is reality in the political arena. This compromise allows the councillor to use social media to stay in contact with residents, provide useful, timely information and engage while still giving all their attention to the business at hand.

@mengbers felt that informed was a relative concept and who was to decide who was informed? While I agree, there are various levels or degrees of being informed, I think most people know if they are informed enough to vote. In fact, the evening of the federal election, I was sitting in a pub waiting for the results when I overheard the people at the table next to us ask which election was going on. They didn’t know if it was federal or provincial or municipal -I think we can all agree, that is uninformed.

The point I made was that we are encouraging residents (sorry @ian_mccor) or citizens, to vote just for the sake of voting. I believe the issue is that we need to encourage people to become informed first. Once people are informed, they will naturally form an opinion and consequently be interested in making their opinion heard – after all, who doesn’t want to be heard?

But I think the issue goes even deeper than this. The issue is about, I’m sorry to use what is becoming an overused phrase, citizen engagement. I believe that a low voter turnout at the polls is an indication of a disengaged population. People put their time and energy into what interests them, into areas that concern them.  Although people say they don’t have time to get informed, what they really mean is it is too low on their priority list.

I have talked to a couple people at the County about ways we can make a concerted effort to increase citizen participation in the next municipal elections. The response I received was basically to say it isn’t an area they are overly concerned about. The average voter turnout for Strathcona County tends to be in the low to mid 30%. Apparently, this is on the high side when compared to other municipalities. And apparently, we are ok with mediocrity.

What do you think? Is an average turnout at the polls good enough? Is a satisfied, complacent and uninformed constituency ok? Should we not be encouraging people to become informed and engaged?

In social media, people police themselves. People will self-select those they trust, people they view as ethical and reliable and the others they will tune out, disregard or even block.  You can act like an obnoxious spoilt child, but like real life, you will find it has consequences.

Most of the unwritten rules in social media are very similar to other forms of communication and interaction. Do unto others as you would have them do unto you. Don’t dominate conversations, listen to people respectfully, don’t lie, don’t shout, don’t spit and put your toys away when you are done.

But some of the other rules are less obvious. Like disclosure. Is it ok to let the people you are interacting with think you are someone you aren’t? Is it ok NOT to tell whom you are working for or what your affiliations are? All of these things are possible to do in social media, but like many other things in life, just because you can, doesn’t mean you should.

When in doubt, ask yourself this question “would this be ok or ethical if it wasn’t social media?”

Would it be right to extol the virtues of a particular product to your friend without telling them you would derive financial gain if they buy it? Is it appropriate to use your good name and reputation to influence someone’s behaviour without telling them how it benefits you? To quote Michael Cohn “Having hidden agendas will only count against you”

When I wrote a blog critiquing municipal election candidates from a communications perspective, I was upfront in saying that I would not be addressing the rural candidates because one of them was a client of mine. Could I have gone ahead and done it without saying anything? Definitely. I wouldn’t have been breaking any laws, but it wouldn’t have been ethical and if it came out, it would hurt my reputation and credibility.

This has become such an issue that the Federal Trade Commission in the US has put into place guidelines that tell advertisers how to handle disclosure.

Have you also noticed how in the United States political candidates who run TV ads have a tagline saying which commercial was endorsed by which candidate? One reason is to stop people from purchasing advertising and saying whatever they want, with no accountability.

Disclosure is about playing fair. Without all the information, like who is telling you something, people can not make informed decisions or opinions. Taking into consideration who is sending the message is part of deciding how much credibility that message has.

More Links

Social Media Ethics to Keep You Out of Trouble

Tweeting Under False Circumstances

I got to thinking about that after the election results. The voter turn out in Strathcona County was reported at 36.6%. According to the County website, this is slightly higher than our average.

Although it is great that we had a higher than average turnout, it still means that more than 63% or 40,761 people didn’t bother or felt they had better things to do.

I am assuming there are a number of reasons why these 40,761 people didn’t vote. My bet would be that at the top of the list is a feeling of apathy or a sense that their vote doesn’t really make a difference. How can we change that misconception? Other people may not have educated themselves on the candidates and therefore felt voting didn’t make much sense. How do you prompt people to care enough to educate themselves?

As a communicator, these questions have been on my mind a lot, even before the latest election results. Influencing behaviour is always an uphill battle but not impossible.

Here are some off-the-top-of-my-head suggestions:

Remove barriers:

• On Election Day, have a special free transit routes set up within Wards that take people directly to their polling station. For example, a bus loops around Georgian Way in Glen Allen picking up voters and dropping them off at the Cultural Hall at Latter Day Saints Church. Heading back with voters who have finished voting.
• Provide phone apps with location of polling stations, hours, candidate’s websites etc.
• Extend voting hours until 9 pm. This gives people who commute into Edmonton for work extra time to get home, eat, settle the kids etc. With electronic counting, the results are available within the hour anyway.

Educate:

• Work with schools and school boards to educate students on rights and responsibilities of a citizen. Have field trips for high school students to Council meetings.
• Provide consistent and informative communication to residents on County business, policies and procedures. Encourage involvement by having Council meetings at friendlier times and places. Not always daytime and not always County Hall.

Create awareness

• All Councillors should make it a priority to be engaged and actively participating in the process with residents, even outside of election time. This means returning phone calls, showing up at meetings, educating residents on the system and encouraging their participation in the workings of their town.
• As election time comes near, a kick-butt communications plan should be put into high gear to encourage participation. This might include informational sessions in the mall, an elections hotline, buttons, posters, ambassadors, advertisements…..

How about we do some brainstorming? What other ideas do you think would work?

But life is life and the only thing you can count on, or so they say, is death, taxes and change.

If you are sitting on a non-profit board, running your own company or in charge of your own department at work, there will come a time when you will have to lead people through the process of change. Although there is a whole profession designed to help people with change management, here are a few tips from a communications perspective that should help you guide people through this process as painlessly as possible.

1. Involvement = Investment

This is the most important step. If at all possible, include your audience in the process. If there is a decision to be made, ask their opinion. Do you need to research options? Ask them to help. Run ideas by them; include them in meetings and discussions.

People who have walked through the process with you will understand the outcome and the reason for the change. They will become your change ambassadors because they understand why it is necessary.

2. Know your audience

Is your non-profit board full of people who value personal one-on-one interactions and who don’t like to be too ‘business-like’ or ‘stuffy’? Or are they a no-nonsense group who just wants the facts, cut to the chase and get to the business at hand?

Keep this in mind as you consider how you will be talking to them about change. A slick PowerPoint presentation complete with charts, tables and statistics might not work for the first group, but work great with the second.

3. Keep it Positive and Real

When talking about upcoming change, make sure you present the information in a positive and upbeat way. But whatever you do, don’t ignore the realities. Don’t pretend the elephant isn’t in the room. If you pretend the negative doesn’t exist, your audience will either think you are an idiot because you can’t see the negative or they will lose trust in you because you are trying to pretend it doesn’t exist. Address the negative but highlight the positives.

4. Provide Assistance

When addressing the negatives, provide some answers. Let them know how they can downplay the negatives. If possible, suggest resources, techniques or tips. Better yet, tell them how YOU are planning to deal with any negative aspects of the change.

5. Follow Up

Don’t just leave people to deal with things. Follow up. Call them and find out how they are coping with the change. Ask if there is anything else you can do to help. Listen.

Have you ever been on the other side when change was implemented and these steps were not followed? Was there any fallout? How receptive were you towards the change?

Useful Links

10 Tips for Communicating Change

PDM and Change Management

Collection of articles on change

The real head-scratching began when they started to share with me that they have found the best way of generating business is to network. If you get out there and let people know who you are, they assured me, you will see results.

Um. But. Um.

As I asked more questions, it became apparent to me that they were making a very critical error in their thinking. They see online social media as technology.  Something for the geeks or those with no life and plenty of time on their hands. What they were missing is that tools like twitter, Facebook or LinkedIn are not primarily pieces of technology but rather methods of interacting and networking.

 If you find that most of your business is the result of networking, then social networking is probably a really good fit for you.  It is just another way of meeting people – yes, even online – and having an opportunity to forge relationships.

Do you have any stories to share about how social media has influenced or affected your business? What is your biggest deterent, if you aren’t involved?

Unfortunately, I often have to resort to telling them they might better understand what I do if they think PR. Oh! Why didn’t you say you’re a publicist. Sigh. And then, inevitably, the word spin comes up.

Just what is spin? Wikipedia suggests it is a pejorative term signifying a heavily biased portrayal in one’s own favor of an event or situation. Hmmmm…. doesn’t that mean everyone uses spin? I mean, really, who portrays events or situations in a way that isn’t in our favour?

•  I was speeding officer? My speedometer must be out, I NEVER speed! This is so embarrassing!
   Vs. yes officer, I was speeding. I thought I could get away with it and just assumed
   you were at the local doughnut shop.
•  I’m so sorry boss, my kid has had the flu all week and although I came in early, I just wasn’t able to
   make up the lost time vs. sorry boss, I didn’t get project done on time because I was feeling lazy
   and sluggish yesterday and didn’t manage my time well.

 An alternative definition is:  Spin is the act of knowingly ignoring aspects of a story or telling outright lies in an attempt to cover up the negative. I’m more comfortable with this definition.

An ethical, professional and quality PR professional would never counsel their client to lie or ignore a potential crisis situation. They will counsel disclosure, honesty and ethical behaviour. To do otherwise is bad business. Just ask Bill “I did not have sexual relations with that woman” Clinton or Gary “go ahead and follow me” Hart

Sometimes, that may mean taking a hard line with a client. As Gini Dietrich, in her blog The Fight Against Destructive Spin explains, “public relations practitioners should be firm with clients… even if it means conflict or uncomfortable situations.”

Good PR isn’t about ignoring the negative or lying about it. I think Betsey Rogers said it best when she said:

What good PR really does is find the great stories, information, perspective and achievements within a company that are already there but haven’t been told/communicated yet – as often clients have difficulty seeing these being close to their own company, products … If there happens to be negative information that is relevant for customers and public audiences to know about, good PR people advocate and practice being proactive in communicating this information to the public.

If lies are involved or if you are afraid of the skeletons in the closet, the line has probably been crossed. If your audience found out all the facts – and they will – would they feel they had been duped? Then the line has probably been crossed.

In my line of work, policy, advocacy & communications, the lion’s share of my writing is intended to persuade. In fact, when you think about it, even when writing a simple notice about a new online survey or upcoming event, the intent is to motivate participation, so still involves a “grab”, a “call to action”.

Given that reality, here are a few things I have learned, mostly by trial and error. While not a comprehensive list by any means, and it’s pretty basic, I hope it will jog some ideas and strategies for you:

1. Get their attention early: Start with a strong statement that summarizes the case you intend to make. Some trainers say you can open with an anecdote or a quotation, but I discourage this. Those to whom you are advocating, particularly in a business setting, are busy people who much prefer the bottom line to a “song and dance”. If you think an example or quote strengthens your argument, then add in where appropriate – but don’t open with it or you’ll have lost the battle before it begins.
2. Know your audience: Having a general sense of who I am trying to persuade really helps me to craft the “ask”. This is particularly true with writing strategic policy to advocate to government. If it’s under provincial jurisdiction and I send it to the feds, I’ve just wasted my time and theirs. Additionally, since I am trying to persuade, I want to know what matters to the target audience and use language and examples that will speak to them.
3. Don’t make assumptions: This is a tough one for me. I get immersed in an issue and forget that others may not have a clue what I am talking about. I am developing a habit, now, of writing all the background details of an issue into the document, and then going back afterward to vet the fluff and make it succinct. The other thing I am learning to do is leave it for a while and then go back and reread it, trying to put myself in the shoes of the recipient. This is quickly becoming a staple part of my writing routine and I sharply notice when I skip this step.
4. Avoid accusations and guilt trips: Since I am also a politician – but don’t hold that against me – I know what it is like to be blasted. Huge tip here: vilification and aggressive presentation is counter-productive. When I am on the receiving end of advocacy, and it is delivered to me like a cannon, I cannot hear the message, even if there is a valid point in there somewhere, because I am focused on the insults. Done in written form, the most frequent response of the target audience is to simply place your letter in the “round file”. Keeping your verbiage respectful and focused on the issue is the best way of getting for message across. The same is true of guilt trips: it is an ineffective method of getting real results. The recipient wants something they can get on board with and be motivated to respond to; guilt as a motivator generates begrudging actions at best. I make a practice of carefully considering what will make my advocacy palatable to the target, asking, “What’s the carrot in this?”
5. Tell them what you want and when you want it: If I had a dollar for every piece of writing I’ve seen where the problem or issue is presented very effectively but the “ask” is missing or else stated very passively. Don’t say “please consider doing this, but if you don’t want to or it doesn’t really work for you, maybe try this instead”. Indicate clear recommendations or requests in a direct manner; it’s the recipient’s job to sort out the details and decide how to proceed. Always ask for a meeting or a response and include a deadline; if it appears to be something that can be relegated to the back burner until that sweet someday when time permits, that is exactly where it will end up.
6. Follow up: I don’t like babysitting people and they don’t like being hounded, so there is a real balance in how to accomplish good follow-up. I send ONE reminder and always frame it as “just following up”. People appreciate having their memories jogged but they don’t want to be backed into a corner.

So, those are some quick and simple tips for effective persuasive writing. I’d love to hear your thoughts on this, and what works for you. Happy writing!
**************************
Hailing originally from Edmonton, Danielle considers herself a true Alberta girl, having lived in several Alberta communities. She came to Red Deer in 1997 and settled in Penhold in 2001. She is married and has three grown children, one teenage step-daughter and two grandchildren.

I believe we all have stories to share. Some are pretty good at sharing them. Others are still trying to figure out their story. You see, storytelling is at the heart of communications. Whether you are a non-profit, a multi-million dollar corporation or one person, we are all about stories.

In order to make sure you story gets heard, you have some work to do. You need to write your story. Is your story about medical research or is about the lives that research touches? Is your story about fundraising or about problem-solving? In order to tell the story, you need to know the story.
Who do you want to tell your story to? Who wants to hear your story? We all think our story is important, but are we telling it to the right people?

But one of the most important questions is this: are you telling your story in a way people can understand? If you aren’t sure what your story is or even who wants to hear it, how will you share it effectively?

I was having a conversation the other day about Toyota and their latest round of recalls. The person I was chatting with wondered if Toyota’s reputation would be negatively affected by the fact they had to recall millions more of their vehicles.

My thoughts are that no, it won’t. Why won’t it? They put out an unsafe product and people should be concerned about purchasing from them in the future, right? Or not.

Toyota’s response was to issue a voluntary recall, educate people on what they should do in the event of an unwanted acceleration and suspend delivery of models that may have been affected. In addition, on the Toyota website, they answered the top 10 questions people had, and outlined their plan to fix the problem. Going forward, Toyota says it is making “brake override” – a system that cuts engine power to the wheels as soon as the brake pedal is pressed – standard equipment on all of its cars.

You see, history has shown that it isn’t necessarily the crisis that will ruin a reputation; it is the response to that crisis.

If this wasn’t the case, then the Tylenol name should be associated with poison and death. After the cyanide poisonings of 1982, why isn’t it? Because in reaction to the crisis, Tylenol immediately recalled 31 million bottles of Tylenol and sucked up the $100 million dollar loss. They also stopped all advertising of the product. Because they put people’s safety before their bottom line, they earned the public’s trust. The message was sent that they were a company that could be counted on to do the right thing.

In contrast, in the fall of 2009 the Alberta government decided to open up H1N1 vaccinations to the general public without giving priority to those considered high risk. When there was a subsequent vaccine shortage, the public was outraged.

Although the government quickly re-grouped and put a new plan in place that gave priority to high risk people, the official response was that they had done nothing wrong. It wasn’t their fault. They couldn’t have known there was going to be a shortage. They knew what they were doing. The public didn’t buy it and became infuriated because no one took responsibility. Will the Alberta public have faith and trust in the government to handle this better next time? Not likely.

As my momma always told me when I was growing up – you can’t always control the situation, but you can control how you respond to it.