For companies trying to develop relationships with the media, here’s another arrow for your quiver: Share the stories they write with your social media networks. This according to journalists and reporters themselves. When asked in the 2017 State of the Media Report by public relations software firm Cision, ‘How can communications professionals improve their media relationships and improve the chances that their content gets media exposure?,’ 31% said ‘share my stories on social media,’ up from 27% in 2016.
It seems almost every reporter, anchor, radio host or ‘influencer’ out there likes to point out they are giving you information that ‘the mainstream media won’t report on.”
Sometimes it’s information the mainstream media “wouldn’t dare report on.”
I would offer that if you are trying to interpret the media landscape today, remove the notion of the mainstream media from your thinking because it doesn’t exist anymore.
The modifier mainstream implied wide distribution and consumption, which meant influence, which meant power. While the venerable New York Times has a circulation of ~2 million (1.4 million digital only subscriptions and 600,000 print subscriptions), a big number, it cannot compete with even second tier social networks (i.e. not Facebook). Reddit, for instance, has ~540 million visitors per month. Tumblr has a (disputed) 300 million monthly visitors.
I kind of like seeing the CEO of Wells Fargo on the hot seat in front of the house and senate for the fraudulent opening of customer accounts. I always felt Wells Fargo’s conduct in general and their attitude toward their customers was criminal.
I just didn’t know how accurate my sentiments were. Don’t get me wrong. The rank and file are nice enough and hard working. But they’re hamstrung by policies from on high that prevent them from acceding to customers needs. And the imprint of senior management is imbedded in information systems that spit out a dizzying array of fees, penalties and abusive policies.
Back in 1991, when I was freelancing, casting central newsman Bob Flaherty, then of Equities magazine and now head of his own financial news service, told me to get on a train to New York, visit the offices of something called Instinet and write a story about it.
Instinet, owned by Reuters at the time, was shaking up the trading business with its recently introduced “crossing” system which allowed institutional investors to trade directly with each other, effectively bypassing the exchanges and stock markets.
I just finished a white paper for a large financial institution on the well worn topic about which is better: active or passive investment strategies.
Sometimes, it’s productive revisit old topics because they bring a fresh perspective that either reinforces ones’ conviction or makes a slight chink in the wall that slowly exerts its influence until the next time the subject is revisited.
No such change of conviction occurred about the superiority of passive investment strategies after a deep dive on behalf of my client. While I managed to write about 2,000 words on the topic, to me, it boils down to this:
My friend, entrepreneur Marc Kramer has started about 20 businesses. Some have succeeded, others have not. Among his start-ups, I asked him if he got signals early on that he had a clunker on his hands, and if so, what the signs were.
Generally, he said, he knew within about 120 days whether or not the concept is going to fly. Here are some of the sign posts he saw along the way that informed his thinking.
Little word of mouth. Kramer says word of mouth is the ultimate acid test. “If consumers are using your product, and are not excited enough and satisfied enough to tell friends, family and colleagues about it, your product or service is unlikely to succeed.”