Tag Archives: apple

Boy Scouts, Apple and PR: the Lure of Money and the Dangers of Hubris

Knobby knees and all, Todd proudly shows off his Eagle Award. He hasn’t been very proud lately.

The Boy Scouts of America has postponed its decision on permitting gay boys and scout leaders into the ranks, undoubtedly bowing to pressure from the very conservative base of organizations that have traditionally sponsored scout troops across the country. No doubt looking to the Episcopal Church’s example, scouting leadership is terrified of splinter scouting organizations. While the Church of Latter Day Saints has kept mum on the subject, BSA leaders are fearful that splintering is inevitable if any policy change is made.

When I earned my Eagle Scout award in 1988, I was damn proud. I am no longer proud. Despite our local council’s rather liberal stance on the issue, I’ve distanced myself from Scouting since my college years. I believe that permitting homosexual Scouts and Scouters (the term for adult leaders) does not run contrary to the Scout Oath. I am certainly not alone — Eagle Scout award recipients have been handing in their badges in droves to protest the organizations stance. Yet the organization holds to its outdated principles. Why? Two simple reasons: money and hubris. Let’s tackle hubris first. Example number one? Apple.

Apple’s Roughshod Approach to PR

Apple has traditionally taken a “my way or the highway” approach to media relations. Major announcements were made at major events, to which only Apple loyalists were invited. Write a bad review? Misbehave at an event? You’re off the list — thank you, don’t come again. But Apple’s “command and control” approach to public relations has shown some kinks in the armor — even Apple couldn’t prevent an engineer from leaving an iPhone prototype behind at a bar.

Apple is continuously held up as the prototypical great marketer, and I wouldn’t disagree. But just because Apple’s a great marketer doesn’t mean it’s a great communicator. Don’t confuse the two. Apple is a great marketer in large part because it makes products that market themselves. To be blunt, you don’t need to be a genius to market Apple products. But maybe I need to change the tense a little, as even Apple seems to be realizing it needs to change how it thinks. As Patrick Coffee reports in PR Newser:

For a long time, it seemed like Steve Jobs and the team at Apple saw traditional PR approaches and tools like press releases as ancient relics. They were over it.

Things are different now, though. The Wall Street Journal tells us that, in the light of recent stock dips and disappointing sales numbers, Apple has decided to “subtly [increase] some of its PR—at least for now.”

What does that mean? Well, the team issued an honest-to-God press release to mark the all-but-meaningless evolution of its operating system from iOS 6 to iOS 6.1–and this was “the first time Apple has issued an official press release for a non-major mobile software” roll-out since way back in 2010.

It seems that the blinding light of poor stock performance has identified a few holes in Apple’s communications strategy. Can the blinding light of public opinion change Scouting?

Scouting’s “Come to Jesus” Moment

Todd’s Boy Scout C.V.

I shared my thoughts about the state of Scouting with my business partner Chuck Tanowitz, and he talked about his experience with Scouting growing up Jewish in New York. Finding a scout troop where a young Jewish boy can fit in isn’t easy, even in and around New York City. Chuck made a wonderful point during our discussion: that the Boy Scouts need to realize that they need boys (be they straight, white, gay, Jewish or Muslim) more than the boys need them. Chuck found alternatives, and so do many other boys.

Scouting is facing a true existential crisis, and while they definitely shouldn’t dive in head first without testing the waters (oh, speaking of testing the waters, plenty of religious institutions have come out in support of gays in Scouting, including the National Jewish Committee on Scouting), they need to completely re-think not only their core policies, but also their communication strategies if they are to remain relevant in the 21st Century.

Advice for the Boy Scouts, Lessons for Communicators

The Boy Scouts of America have come across as backwards, disorganized and reactive as they’ve struggled through these past few years. Gentlemen, you have until May, but if you need longer, say so now! Get your act together. Do not get hung up on politics, procedures and principles with no regard to serving your community or surviving. Put a crisis plan in place. Set deadlines and stick to them. Understand that this is a divisive issue, and be willing to accept the consequences, however dire. But equally, understand that inaction sends just as much of a message as acts of consequence do. As I learned in COM 100, you cannot not communicate, and right now, you’re speaking volumes.

The iPhone 4: PR Problem or Feature?

When my iPhone 3GS drops a call I blame AT&T. It never occurred to me to blame Apple. Why would I? They designed a beautiful device that does so much more than make calls! Though, the Wall Street Journal suggests that I should, in fact, blame Apple. An article today notes that Apple not only knew about the iPhone 4.0 antenna issues, but also knew that it had issues with the antenna in earlier phones, including the 3GS.

In a piece on Digits, Jennifer Valentino-DeVries lists 5 things Apple should do today to make amends with its customers, including apologize and offer both temporary and permanent fixes.

But all this assumes that the antenna issue is an actual problem.

“But Chuck,” you say. “How is this not a problem? Of course it’s a problem!”

Well, it sort of is, but it sort of isn’t. An iPhone 4.0 user said to me, after reading my last post, that the antenna issue is well overblown. Then he added “and the battery life is incredible!” The sarcastic side of me thinks “if you can’t make calls that battery will probably last forever.”

But the point is, he’s willing to overlook the antenna so he can use the other features of the phone, provided it offers a lot more. And we all know how great Steve Jobs is at offering “one more thing.”

That’s sort of what’s behind the blog post by Antonio Rodriguez, in which he points out that the antenna’s internal design allows for a symmetry that will come into play later, possibly in the form of an active secondary touch surface on the back of the phone.

So is this a design flaw or a feature? We’ll find out more today.

iPhone, Gizmodo and Jason Chen: Yes, bloggers are journalists, but is that the issue?

Jason Chen (pictured right) over at Gizmodo had an amazing scoop. For $5000 (paid by Gizmodo) he landed the next-generation iPhone, a gadget left behind at a bar by a poor Apple employee (who is no longer such) and seemingly picked up by a passerby.

But now the story has taken a darker turn. Today it came out that police raided Chen’s home on Friday night and seized quite a bit of equipment like digital cameras, hard drives, etc. Why? According to the search warrant, because the items may have been used in a felony.* Gawker Media is now arguing that Chen is protected under the Shield Law, drawing a direct argument that bloggers are journalists. According to TechCrunch, the San Mateo District Attorney is investigating whether a crime took place and collecting evidence, but Gawker argues that because of the shield law, they cannot take the materials from Chen, as he is a journalist and therefore protected. As TechCruch defines the law “California’s shield laws protect journalists from having to turn over their sources and unpublished information they’ve collected as part of their reporting. However, Gizmodo could be found to have committed a crime when they paid the phone’s finder for the device.”

Frankly, I don’t dispute that bloggers are journalists. (Full disclosure: I have pitched Chen several times in the past) and as of when I am writing this article, the investigation has come to a “pause” because the shield law may apply.

My problem is, and always has been, with the idea of a Shield Law. It’s not that I think journalists shouldn’t protect their sources. Of course they should. But I also believe that journalists are citizens and citizens, in this day and age, are journalists. The First Amendment applies to everyone, so how can you create a class of citizens for whom it is more important? How can you decided that one class of citizens can maintain protection for information they have that could be relevant in a criminal case, but another class cannot be protected? No journalist would argue that we should have a “journalist registry,” so how can you define who is a journalist and who isn’t?

As Justice White wrote in Branzburg v. Hayes: “Sooner or later, it would be necessary to define those categories of newsmen who qualified for the privilege, a questionable procedure in light of the traditional doctrine that liberty of the press is the right of the lonely pamphleteer who uses carbon paper or a mimeograph just as much as of the large metropolitan publisher who utilizes the latest photocomposition methods.”

That was 1972. Drop in “blogger” for “pamphleteer” and you see where this is headed. In other words: it’s not up to the courts, nor the legislators, to decide who is and isn’t a journalist.

I don’t have a real answer here to the obvious problem. How can you ensure the free flow of information without turning journalists, bloggers and other publishers of information into arms of law enforcement?

* A lot of people see Apple’s invisible hand behind this police investigation. It’s possible. But keep in mind, Apple is not shy about suing to protect itself. Remember the site Thinksecret.com? Apple sued them into an oblivion a few years back. How many companies can sue their most ardent fans and get away with it? I ask this question even as I type on a MacBook Pro while my iPhone charges behind me. Would we bloggers and tech folks be as forgiving if Apple didn’t produce great products?

Why iPad Won't Save the World (and why it might)

Fifteen years ago I sat in the World Room at the Columbia Journalism School and watched as a digital expert from Knight Ridder showed off a piece of cardboard.

Really, it was a mockup of a type of digital content delivery device (video below). The hope, he said, was that the device would have a touch screen and use a form of electronic ink. People would receive their “newspaper” overnight via telephone line and have it in the morning. The pictures would come to life as videos at a touch and it would save the newspaper industry.

Though, he admitted, the technology just wasn’t there to make the vision possible.

I don’t need to tell you that iPad achieves that vision. Only, there’s one problem: it isn’t cheap enough. Well, that’s not really a problem, but let me get to that.

Back in the World Room my classmates went nuts. They were terrified of the digital divide, that the device would be expensive and that because of it newspapers would be available only to those with means and not to the majority of Americans.

No, the Knight Ridder people assured us, the only way this would work is if the device was cheap enough to be almost a giveaway item, like one of those cheap calculators you get at the local bank.

Obviously the iPad isn’t going to be that cheap. And on one level that’s a problem. But on another, not really.

The history of communications is littered with haves and have nots. In fact, it relies on it. The 1950s is often called the “Golden Age of Television” because the shows tended to be written for a more literate audience. Well, that makes sense when you consider that TVs were expensive, so only people who were wealthier (and more educated) tended to purchase them.

Flash forward to the 1970s and 80s and you see the same thing happen with cable television. Move into the early 90s and it’s the Internet. All along the way advertisers tout the next media as having a “more educated demographic” and the fact that they have a higher disposable income.

As a particular medium becomes more saturated and reaches a broader audience, it’s more difficult to find the desired demographic. Not to fear, another communications for (Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn) comes along to save the day.

So yes, iPad will have its adopters, and copies. People will design content for this class of devices, just as they design content for smart phones, in order to reach the desired demographic. Over time, the price will come down and the audience will expand.

Though, I doubt my bank will give me one any time soon.