http://www.bibsonomy.org/burst/user/acf/PRBibSonomy BuRST Feed for /user/acf/PR2008-08-21T12:51:10+02:00May08http://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/210bd7814281575274e6b9fac9903d5db/acfacf2008-06-01T16:51:41+02:00PR public_relations Olympics blog danwei Lenovo <span style="color:#555555;">Robert <a href="http://www.bibsonomy.org/author/Ness">Ness</a> </span><em>Danwei.org</em><em>September 3rd, 2:28 PM2007-09-03. </em>Sun Jun 01 16:51:41 CEST 2008Danwei.orgSeptember 3rd, 2:28 PMChina Businesscast: Olympics Marketing Part 42007-09-03PR public_relations Olympics blog danwei Lenovo 2008 Torch Relay RouteThis is the final part of our series on Olympics communications. In this episode I speak with the PR executive at Ketchum Newscan who is handling the Olympics campaign for Lenovo. He discusses the "digital press conference" used to announce Lenovo's design for the Olympic torch. Not mentioned in this episode is that the media buzz following the torch announcement was drowned out by the news of Taiwan denying Beijing's torch relay plans. Though it is common for PR announcements to get swept away by sexier news stories, it still serves as a reminder of how politics is casting a shadow on the 2008 Olympics. Olympics Marketing Part 1 Olympics Marketing Part 2: I continue with Imagethief and Tom Doctoroff on the Olympics, this time tackling ambush marketing, the way non-sponsors can get in on the Olympic action. Imagethief gives us examples of ambush marketing and warns us of the legal trouble that companies could find themselves in down the road if they attempt this type of campaign. Tom Doctoroff, CEO Greater China of JWT, seems more optimistic about the opportunities for non-sponsoring brands, and gives good examples. Olympics Marketing Part 3 Olympics Communications: Executive Summary As some interviewee's have commented the Beijing Olympics are tied to national and even individual aspirations — a volatile context for which a marketing message. Moreover, laws regarding Olympics-related marketing are strict. Companies paying millions to be Olympics sponsors must worry about their messages getting lost in all the noise. For others, the difference between success and failure in an Olympics-related marketing campaign is the difference between finding a goldmine and hitting a land mine. From a PR perspective, the Olympics is an opportunity to build national image and credibility, this is as true for China as it has been for other countries in the past. The stakes are high for China considering the emotional stake citizens have in the Games, as well as China's goals for affecting how the country is perceived abroad. This makes for an ominous prospect of a "PR crisis" occurring for China during the Games. In the blogosphere, the consensus is environmental problems and activism are the main threats. In terms of activism, the concern is about how the government will respond to the activists, as well as the activities of activists themselves. Notably, not many people are talking about terrorism. As former ChinaBusinesscast interviewees have pointed out, the negative feedback effects of blogs and BBS's combined with online nationalism make PR crises in China particularly nasty. Any news worthy event that occurs during the 2008 Olympics will be magnified greatly on BBS sites in China. Most notably, this is will be the first Olympics held since blogging has become mainstream in China or anywhere else. Summer 2008 will be an interesting time for online media. Links and Sources CNet: Lenovo's Torch Design Washington Post: Taiwan Rejects China's Torch Relay Plans On Danwei: Mia Farrow's Campaign; Showing off the real China at the Olympics: ; Just how bad is the air in Beijing?; Let the Spiel begin; Bloggers analyze Olympic traffic test China PR guru Image Thief: Politics of the Olympics Global Voices: A roundup of Chinese blogs on this subject (some later deleted). Boingboing: Olympic Stadium Designer Rebels; Activist Blogging in Beijing Chinadialogue: Beijing's Olympics-sized Traffic Problem.May08http://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/2f6297359ce02a2eb7fdd3d14d94a3ef9/acfacf2008-06-01T16:51:41+02:00earthquake PR crisis_management hollywood <span style="color:#555555;">Eric <a href="http://www.bibsonomy.org/author/Mu">Mu</a> </span><em>Danwei.org</em>(<em>20080528</em>)Sun Jun 01 16:51:41 CEST 2008Danwei.orgSharon Stone boycott20080528earthquake PR crisis_management hollywood Today's Information Times ran a full page special about Hollywood actress Sharon Stone's comments about the Sichuan earthquake last week at the Cannes film festival. Stone suggested that the quake may have been a result of "karma" from China's treatment of Tibetans. The headline on the newspaper's front page reads "Sharon Stone is an enemy of the whole nation". The inside full page special uses another headline: The Chinese people spontaneously start an anti-Sharon movement". Below the headline, there is a roundup of online criticism against the Hollywood star, laid out in two blocks with the top group captioned: "Chinese netizen: She is a pseudo-philanthropist"; the bottom one is captioned "American netizen: She should apologize." Caption of the top image: "Sharon Stone is having a headache."In the newspaper, her compliment to China as a "great country" during last year's Shanghai Movie Festival was dug out and compared with her "karma" comment. Other anecdotes about her—including a story about her calling a German audience "nasty little Germans"—proved, according to the newspaper, that she has always been a "big mouth". An article based on an interview with her during her stay in Shanghai that may make an interesting read can be found on Shanghai Daily in English. On the top right corner of the full page anti-Stone special is a translated excerpt from a statement by Dior, a French cosmetic brand that Sharon Stone endorses. The statement says that Dior does not agree with Sharon Stone's remarks. However the original version of the statement has apparently not yet surfaced on the Internet. Today's The Beijing News also reported the Sharon Stone story but in a much more moderate fashion. With most papers still putting their attention on the Sichuan quake zone, Sharon Stone's controversial remarks did not make the front page in most cases. However, there have been many calls to boycott Sharon Stone and ban her movies from China by both netizens. Ng See-yuen (吴思远), founder of the UME Cineplex chain that operates theaters in several Chinese cities, has been widely quoted in the Chinese media condemning Stone's remarks and on the Hollywood Reporter's website saying "his company would not show the Hollywood star's films". There is a video of Stone making her remarks and a transcript of the bad karma comment below.May08http://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/2e76652b006f9f9d12ace68c97e73ab68/acfacf2008-06-01T16:51:41+02:00Public_Relations PR Shanghai blog Chinese_media corruption China PR&media fun <span style="color:#555555;">William <a href="http://www.bibsonomy.org/author/Moss">Moss</a> </span><em>Imagethief (Blog)</em><em>29.01.8:14 AM20051101. </em><em>Imagethief is William Moss, a public relations professional and writer working in China since 2004. The opinions in this blog are his own, not those of his<span class="info">...<span>Imagethief is William Moss, a public relations professional and writer working in China since 2004. The opinions in this blog are his own, not those of his agency. For more information see &#196;bout Imagethief&quot;, below.</span></span> . </em>Sun Jun 01 16:51:41 CEST 2008Imagethief (Blog)29.01.8:14 AMImagethief is William Moss, a public relations professional and writer working in China since 2004. The opinions in this blog are his own, not those of his agency. For more information see "About Imagethief", below.Are PR and MNCs Corrupting Chinese Media?20051101Public_Relations PR Shanghai blog Chinese_media corruption China PR&media fun The week before last I had lunch with a foreign correspondent who asked me if there was corruption in PR in China. Although I was only providing background, and not speaking to him on the record, I was, to put it politely, diplomatic in my answer. Ever mindful of the brand that graces my business-card, it’s an issue that I tend to tread lightly upon. I did, however, send him on to a friend who has been here longer than me and who works independently and is, therefore, inclined to be more forthcoming about such things. But the topic arose again last week, courtesy of bloggers Bingfeng, of Bingfeng Teahouse, and Myrick, of Asiapundit. Bingfeng fired the first shot in a post telling foreigners who complain about China’s media restrictions to find something better to do with their time. The crux of his argument was the blocking of any individual site affects only a few thousand people. However, a pervasive culture of media corruption fostered by “foreign MNCs” (multinational corporations) affects everyone in China: As we all know, the blocking of these web sites, in its worst situation, influence the life of a few thousands in china, while at the same time, the corrupt journalists/media taking money from firms and various organizations and writing misleading articles to fool the public is a everyday story in china, as i know, the norm of taking money from firms to make favorable media exposures was cultivated by many MNCs in china, which bribe chinese journalists in the name of "media PR" or "marketing PR" activities, and bribe them when they have a "PR crisis". such collusion affects the lives of millions of people and you could do something to change it, especially a lot of them are related with MNCs in china. There is some truth in what Bingfeng wrote. On this site I have previously written, tongue somewhat in cheek, of the “transportation claim” commonly paid to journalists who attend press events in China. According to the journalist I had lunch with, foreign technology companies originated this practice about ten years ago. I don’t know the detailed history. Anyone who does is invited to comment. So I agree with Bingfeng to some extent. However, before he makes me his “star of the week” again, he needs to read on, because I’m going to bite later. Myrick posted a rather interesting response to Bingfeng. First, he pointed out that he, a foreign correspondent by day, was recently offered 500 RMB (about US$60) himself while attending an event sponsored by a nameless European telecommunications firm. He mentioned that, although he refused the money, three Chinese journalists who were present accepted. I suspect that this was vanilla “transportation claim” (车马费) as 500 RMB is the amount typically offered to journalists who attend an event from out of town, while 200 RMB is the going rate for journalists from in town. If Myrick was attending an event in the town he is based in, then there is some inflation happening. I would like to point out that whoever offered Myrick the money, even if it was simply transportation claim, was an idiot or badly trained. Foreign correspondents work differently than Chinese ones on many levels. Any PR firm, local or foreign, that doesn’t train their staff on these differences is courting trouble. In my company we often dissuade clients from mixing local and foreign journalists not only because it makes things like the transportation claim awkward, but because we often have different messages for domestic and overseas audiences. In a rebuttal to Bingfeng that I agreed with, Myrick wrote the following: Bingfeng is correct that this is a serious problem for China - a 2003 study by the Institute for Public Relations [proxy link – WM] puts China dead last in a list of 66 countries in a study on the acceptability of bribery for coverage. Still, by citing the existence of this problem as a criticism of free-speech advocates he is making a common fallacy of argument by evading the issue. This is also known as the Chewbacca defense. That last link is from the blocked-in-China Wikipedia. I regret that readers here won't be able to access it without a proxy. The problems of censorship in and press bribery in China are related issues, both shape the content of news here. But to say that censorship of a website is something that only affects a "few thousand" is a gross understatement. While it may be only a handful of residents who are affected by a block on a single blogspot site, the control of information in China promotes ignorance, retards democratic development and prevents the building of an educated civil society. This affects 1.3 billion. The report that Myrick points to is well worth looking at. The reason why I agree with Myrick’s response, besides correctly calling out the “Chewbacca defense”, is that it points out that there is a relationship between corruption of the media and censorship. I think that relationship is quite deep, and has to do with how the media have evolved here and what Chinese societal expectations of the media are. I also think that relationship should be looked at in terms of corruption in general. Not to be dissuaded, Bingfeng came back with the following: [The] so-called "bribery for coverage" is more than just giving money to get favorable media exposures, thanks to the cultivatons of MNCs in china, the collusion between media and business has evolved into more sophisticated forms that influence/manipulate the public and they are unfortuantely followed by more and more organizations and individuals. khodorkovski-style chinese firms are on the horizons and their agents are already very active. this imposes an immediate threat to the emerging "civil society" in china, not the censorship. "free speech/press fighters" could do something to change the media corruptions, but in the short term i don't see their chant could do anything to reduce the media censorships. MNCs are the one who set the norms of media bribery, government "PR", media "PR", marketing "PR", etc. and our "free speech/press fighters" could do something to ask them to change the norms or even follow a more strict business ethics. this is a more approachable goal. like many things in china, the dysfunctional part of the system is not removed directly through a confrontational approach, but through the cultivations of incremental parts of the system. a less corrupt media will forster an environment that leads to less censorship. the only disadvantage of a different roadmap is that hte process will be less satisfying for the moral superiority of some westerners and perhaps doesn't fit into the political agendas of some of them. Here again, Bingfeng is half right. There is “collusion between media and business [that] has evolved into more sophisticated forms that influence/manipulate the public.” We call that public relations, and it’s what I do for a living. But no matter how distasteful you might find it, it is not necessarily corrupt, and seems not to have undermined civil society in most of the rest of the world. The origins of the transportation claim notwithstanding, blaming MNCs and PR companies for corruption in the Chinese media is absurd. Complicit though they may sometimes be, it’s like blaming vultures for the death of your horse in the desert. This argument is the reframing of a victimization theme I often see wielded against foreigners and multinationals when discussing problems in China. It plays well on nationalist sentiments and often does a really good job of deflecting attention away from serious, underlying issues worthy of scrutiny. The Chewbacca defense, as Myrick pointed out. Furthermore, to suggest that a cleaner media will lead to fewer restrictions on free speech is, quite simply, to put the cart before the horse. I believe the exact opposite is true. Free speech and a less fettered press are much more likely to be effective weapons against corruption. Who Are You Calling Corrupt? Chinese companies and institutions, as anyone who lives here rapidly learns, are quite capable of corruption without any foreign influence whatsoever. Corruption, in the media or anywhere else, isn’t something that springs up spontaneously, or as the result of the wicked influence of foreign MNCs, who are perennial favorite targets of Chinese nationalism. Corruption is like a gas. It’s always there and it expands to fill the shape and volume of the space available for it. The volume of space available for corruption is created by lack of transparency and by well established patterns of government and commercial behavior. While many countries, including the United States, have corruption, China leaves a comparatively wide-open space for it. For some details, sift through Transparency International’s website, which ranks China at number 78, alongside such illustrious company as Morocco, Sri Lanka, Senegal and Suriname. Or this more recent article (subscription) by Andrew Yeh, one of the Financial Times’ Beijing-based journalists, on the OECD’s assessment on the impact of widespread corruption in China. However, this isn’t to say that some MNCs won’t collude with corruption. MNCs tend to be amoral beasts that adapt themselves superbly to any environment in which they need to operate. Many governments are aware of this, which explains laws like the United States’ Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. Companies like mine often help to clean up the mess when MNCs get caught misbehaving. Bingfeng may be shocked to learn how often those cleanup efforts involve absolutely no bribes. For the record, in my time in the PR industry in China, I have never witnessed anything I felt to be corrupt. I have never seen anyone in my company do anything I felt was corrupt. Nor, in the course of their work with me, have any of my clients, all MNCs, done anything I felt was corrupt or even borderline. One of my clients’ policies on separating advertising and paid coverage from PR is so strict that we don’t even help with advertorial copy, something I did all the time in Singapore. If I was asked to do something I felt was wrong, I would decline to do it and warn whoever was asking me of the consequences. If necessary, I would resign before compromising myself, my colleagues or my company. I don’t think this is likely to happen, so it doesn’t keep me up nights. Our (Chinese) finance director is one of the most scrupulous and careful men I have ever met. He is constantly reminding us of our financial disclosure and probity obligations as part of a listed, international media conglomerate. Furthermore, despite the occasional ghastly scandal, there is no company as aware of the value of its reputation as a global PR company. None of this, however, means that Bingfeng is wrong about there being corruption in the media or in PR in China. Within our office, it’s the local, Chinese PR firms that take the most flack for corruption. Chinese consultants in my office have spoken to me many times of what they perceive as the distinctly lower ethical standards of local firms. This may simply be their pride talking, or just empty gossip. Although given how close many of our Chinese consultants are to Chinese journalists, they’d be in a position to hear about anything that happens. Now, allow me to pose a hypothetical scenario. If you’re MNC X, and you want to buy some coverage savaging your bitter competitor, MNC Y, in the China market, which of the two following PR firms would you use to arrange it? The SOX compliant multinational PR firm with public company accounting requirements and an international reputation to protect or, The privately held, locally owned firm with no international reputation or financial disclosure obligations. Simple risk management suggests the latter would be a better choice. Now perhaps, was this to actually happen, it would be a case of a wicked MNC leading an otherwise chaste Chinese PR company down the dark path of corruption. More likely, it would be willing buyer/willing seller. Furthermore, I’d be shocked Smurf blue to hear that Chinese companies, forever battling their own corruption demons, would turn up their noses at these methods. I don’t think they’d need to learn the trick from foreign MNCs. In case you are wondering, although I think it’s a bad idea, I don’t feel that the transportation claim is corrupt. Media corruption thrives in the dark, when its influence is hidden. The transportation claim is completely matter-of-fact and auditable. You can follow the trail, from our cost estimate for events to our invoices to clients to the list of exactly which journalists showed up at a press event, and their sign-in signatures. It’s never guaranteed us good coverage, or even attendance at events. Frankly, I think it’s a desperate waste of money, and it will be a good day for the maturity of Chinese media when it is abolished. But that will only happen when the Chinese media decide for themselves to abolish it, or when all companies with PR efforts in China, both local and foreign, decide to abolish it together. It would take a company with a large risk appetite indeed to unilaterally decide no longer offer the transportation claim, especially while their competitors still did. Is my position hypocrisy? Or rationalization? Maybe. What is this Media of which You Speak? I have been working in China for just over a year, and I, as an individual, am not an expert on the Chinese media. But I have been involved in media-related work, one way or another, for thirteen years, my graduate degree is in media studies, and I work in an industry whose stock in trade is an understanding of media. With that disclosure, you may take the following observations as you will. The problem with Chinese media is not that it is being corrupted by ne’er-do-well foreign MNCs or PR firms. Rather, it is that the Chinese media are in transition from explicit state control to something subtler and more reflective of modern Chinese society. It has become something that isn’t developed country media, but which looks like it from a distance. Bound up in this transition are the ongoing changes in China’s media regulations as the government tries to figure out what it wants Chinese media to be, and shifting public expectations of what role the media should play in Chinese society. The tremors of this transition have been documented in Chinese media, overseas media and, not least, by the China blogging community. An interesting recent example includes ESWN’s post on fraudsters representing themselves as journalists. If all this seems like a recipe for confusion…it is. This shows in, yes, the opportunities for corruption and, more mundanely, in how the media relate to authority, to multinationals and, of course, to PR firms. There is a relationship aspect to PR work everywhere. It’s formalized. We call it, surprisingly enough, “media relations”. An ability to build good relationships with journalists is one of our marketable skills. Here in China, our relationships with journalists are especially cozy. Not corrupt, mind you, just cozy. This coziness isn’t unique to China any more than media corruption or the influence of corporate or state parent organizations. Anyone who thinks that the US, for example, is immune to this hasn’t been following the salacious Plamegate affair. This has done wonders to illuminate the shameful coziness that greases the operations of both the Washington DC press corps and the spin-obsessed White House. But in China this coziness is more pervasive. Although I never did PR in the US, I did do it in Singapore, which also has state-controlled media often accused of pliancy. Even in Singapore, no matter how good my personal relationships with journalists were (and they were pretty good), there was often an adversarial quality to the professional relationship. That wasn’t necessarily expressed in hostility or bad press, but in healthy skepticism, tough questions, and wariness of spin. All qualities of a decent press corps. Here in China I find, on average, that it is much easier for us to control a line of questioning or set it in advance, review coverage and quotes before they go to press, suggest themes and anticipate the tone of stories. Journalists here often expect us to package stories quite completely for them, giving us yet more room to set the agenda. We have stenographers at most media events, and send complete transcripts of press conferences and round tables to the journalists who attend them, often on the same day. It is expected that we will do this. When we can package a story more completely, we can dictate its tone more effectively. Among my Chinese team members, the nickname for pliant journalists is “rabbits”. Not the image of ferocity. Now, I want to stress two important things. First, relationships are not a red carpet. We flacks in China are not excused from having to come up with good pitches and interesting events. And we’re not immune to bad press, by any stretch of the imagination. We also have real PR challenges that are unique to doing business in China. It’s just that the relationships are more central to how we work. In the land of guanxi, this is not so surprising. Second, and most important, my observations above are industry generalizations. I know many extremely bright and motivated Chinese journalists who take real pride in their work. They are capable of asking dynamite questions, picking up killer angles, and writing hard-hitting and intelligent stories. Chinese journalists have suffered and died for their commitment to their work, and for their integrity and many are worthy of the highest respect. (Contrary to what you might think, most PR people are news junkies and really appreciate dynamite journalism, as long as it isn’t causing trouble for our own clients.) Even many of the “rabbits” are good, smart people working in an established system. Please do not interpret my observations as a condemnation of Chinese journalists. Some Chinese media pliancy may simply be a result of a wildly booming industry that is hungry for content. The seller of a product that is in high demand, such as particular content, exerts more control. That’s why Hollywood publicists can dictate question lists for stars, whereas corporate flacks like me seldom can. But I think some of it also descends from the Chinese media’s recent legacy of control and management from above. Chinese media are still evolving their editorial standards and modes of operation. PR firms, multinationals and Chinese firms will all figure out how best to operate and achieve their goals in this environment. That might be cynical, and you don’t have to like it, but it isn’t corrupt. Ruthlessly separating my preferences as a media consumer from my objectives as a PR pro, I am under no obligation to tell a journalist to ask tougher questions of my client. Mouthpieces or Watchdogs? What does China want from its media? Let me return to the idea that started it all off: the relationship between free speech and corruption. The media can be a potent weapon in fighting corruption, given the space to do so. A few years ago, Jiang Zemin appeared to recognize this when he cited media as one of the country’s great tools in its perennial war against corruption. Of course the media themselves were fighting their own corruption demons in ways that went far beyond low-rent payola for good coverage, as 2004 busts of senior editorial staff from the well known Southern Metropolis News and Nanfang Daily Group showed. But beyond media’s own corruption problems, counting on them to help unmask corruption demands independence and a culture of enterprise that needs room to grow. The current government seems to have different ideas, as this recent article from The Economist (subscription) reports: The Chinese government's increasingly hardline stance is encapsulated in Document 16, promulgated this spring. Among other things, this banned the practice of yidi baodao, or “reports from non-local places”, with journalists travelling to distant cities where, free of their local minders, they could write harder-hitting stories about corrupt local officials or social unrest. “This was the best hope for China developing an open press,” says Mr [Nicolas] Becquelin [of human-rights group HRIC]. In Hong Kong, papers critical of China, like Apple Daily, are complaining that advertisers are fleeing because of threats to their mainland businesses. Journalists there are suddenly finding it harder to get visas for travel to the mainland. These regulations were also covered nicely by the invaluable Chinese media blog, Danwei. Even more worrying, some suggest that anti-corruption drives in China are simply tools to clean out the lingering remnants of the previous power structure and, bizarrely, to implement monetary policy, as suggested by this Asia Times Online article. So, even in their role as corruption fighters, the Chinese media face the specter of being cynically deployed tools of state policy. Media can, of course, be effective weapons against corruption, whether that’s corruption in government, business or within their own industry. Even if, for no other reason than fulfilling their own business objectives by attracting eyeballs, most publications love nothing more than to break a big scandal wide open. But that will never happen here unless the government can decide what role the media should fill in society: mouthpieces or watchdogs. They can’t be both. You can’t state-manage a media industry to effectiveness as anti-corruption crusaders, and keep it muzzled at the same time. You have to do the opposite. Give them space, in the form of freedom of the press, which is just another way of saying freedom of speech. That will help to lift the veil on corruption everywhere including, yes, in the media itself. So when we arrogant foreigners rail against the restrictions on the Chinese media, we aren’t ignoring the problem of corruption in the media, or anywhere else. In fact, we are advocating for the unleashing of China’s most potent weapon against corruption. A truly free media. Filed under: China, PR & Media (Old)May08http://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/2c2a53c370cf8baeb2bb5c97129e6dcc0/acfacf2008-06-01T16:51:41+02:00blog fun PR&media Shanghai corruption Public_Relations PR China Chinese_media <span style="color:#555555;">William <a href="http://www.bibsonomy.org/author/Moss">Moss</a> </span><em>Imagethief (Blog)</em><em>29.01.8:14 AM20070129. </em><em>Imagethief is William Moss, a public relations professional and writer working in China since 2004. The opinions in this blog are his own, not those of his<span class="info">...<span>Imagethief is William Moss, a public relations professional and writer working in China since 2004. The opinions in this blog are his own, not those of his agency. For more information see &#196;bout Imagethief&quot;, below.</span></span> . </em>Sun Jun 01 16:51:41 CEST 2008Imagethief (Blog)29.01.8:14 AMImagethief is William Moss, a public relations professional and writer working in China since 2004. The opinions in this blog are his own, not those of his agency. For more information see "About Imagethief", below.WaPo's Ed Cody on media bribery in China20070129blog fun PR&media Shanghai corruption Public_Relations PR China Chinese_media How did I miss this? The Washington Post's Ed Cody has written a fascinating story (via David Wolf's Silicon Hutong) about a syndrome we in the PR business in China run into regularly: the practice of media extortion in China. I can't comment extensively right now, but this is a very real issue. Cody gets into the history and consequences of the practice: In many ways, blackmail journalism grew naturally out of a system in which Communist Party censors control the news rigorously, barring reports that could be seen as unfavorable to the party or contrary to the government's political goals. If the ruling party distorts the news for political reasons, blackmailing reporters have concluded, why wouldn't they do it themselves for financial reasons? In addition, local party officials, long used to manipulating information, have been complicit in the payoff system when it suits their needs. In the everybody-does-it atmosphere, even non-reporters have found ways to get in on the take by posing as journalists. After the August 2005 mine disaster, for instance, reporters and their friends in Henan province dispatched a flurry of cellphone messages as soon as they heard the news -- not because they were eager to report on it, but because they knew local officials would be eager to hush it up. By the time Fan Youfeng of the Henan Business News arrived at the mine, in a village in Jiliao county, local officials said they had already given money to so many reporters and phony reporters that the coffers were dry. But still more people showed up, Fan wrote, and the officials sought more cash, pressing the mine owners to chip in. Journalists and poseurs lined up to get their handouts, he said, with some pushing and jumping the queue. Over several days, the extortionists carried away 200,000 yuan, or more than $25,000, he reported, quoting officials and a list signed by those who got the cash. Encouraged by Ma, his editor, Fan wrote a story for the Henan Business News about what had happened. It was the first open discussion of what had become a widespread if secretive practice, Ma said with a note of pride. As a result, however, an official from the central government propaganda department visited from Beijing and accused Ma of publishing an "inappropriate" and "false" story. The newspaper was suspended for a month, Ma was forced to retire and Fan was reprimanded, Ma said. The death toll from the mine disaster was never reported, he added. Don't miss David's own post on this issue. David is a former colleague of mine and veteran of public relations in China. David explains how companies fall into this trap and lays down a very clear policy for avoiding it. He writes: There's only one way to avoid [falling into this trap]: Repeat after me: "No matter what my PR people, my PR agency, or anyone else tells me, OUR COMPANY WILL NEVER PAY FOR COVERAGE, either directly or indirectly." I wonder how many of our agencies follow that very sound advice.May08http://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/231c2dc3afd89ea8229cd71b41f6478db/acfacf2008-06-01T16:51:41+02:00Shanghai fun olympics Public_Relations blog PR <span style="color:#555555;">William <a href="http://www.bibsonomy.org/author/Moss">Moss</a> </span><em>Imagethief (Blog)</em><em>03.02. 4:20 AM20070203. </em><em>Imagethief is William Moss, a public relations professional and writer working in China since 2004. The opinions in this blog are his own, not those of his<span class="info">...<span>Imagethief is William Moss, a public relations professional and writer working in China since 2004. The opinions in this blog are his own, not those of his agency. For more information see &#196;bout Imagethief&quot;, below.</span></span> . </em>Sun Jun 01 16:51:41 CEST 2008Imagethief (Blog)03.02. 4:20 AMImagethief is William Moss, a public relations professional and writer working in China since 2004. The opinions in this blog are his own, not those of his agency. For more information see "About Imagethief", below.Saturday PR blog: I'm sorry, the government has killed your story20070203Shanghai fun olympics Public_Relations blog PR Colleagues from American and European offices often ask Imagethief how PR in China is different from PR in the west. Usually I give a two-part answer. First I tell them that were they to step into our offices in China they would see many things that they would instantly recognize as garden variety PR. We write press releases, organize events, craft angles and pitch stories to competitive publications and journalists, develop communication strategies and train executives in how to handle the media, among other things. But then I tell them about what's different, usually sticking to the highlights. In the best diplomatic, spin-doctorese I tell them that the Chinese media's "ethical framework is not entirely developed". By which I mean that it is, in many ways, a corrupt swamp. (This is something of a theme in the foreign media recently, having been covered by the Washington Post, New York Times and AP with the Lan Chengzhang case as catalyst.) The other difference is that the government has explicit power over the media agenda. Most of the time, self-censorship is the rule. However the propaganda ministry --中宣部-- also sends out guidance on sensitive issues to major media. Editors who want to keep their jobs are expected to toe the line. Occasionally an acute issue will motivate a directive to halt coverage of a topic, as when media were directed to layoff the Foxconn-Apple scandal of last year. (Recently this has led to proscribed topics sloshing over into journalists' and editors' blogs, but that's a topic for ESWN.) We were reminded of the realities of government management of the media agenda recently, shortly after arranging an interview between one of our MNC clients and a Chinese business magazine. The magazine in question had requested the interview, with an eye on exploring our client's business and investments in China. The discussion was vigorous but reasonably balanced and we were expecting a decent article as a result, with publication planned prior to Chinese New Year. About two weeks after the interview, one of the editors involved called us and said the story would be "delayed". Apparently the magazine had just received guidance from the Propaganda Ministry to be more "sensitive" in publishing stories that involved foreign investment, particularly around certain industries or well-known Chinese brands. We had not, at first blush, considered the story we were developing to be particularly risky or sensitive. But the journalists and editors at the magazine were, as you would expect, taking the ministerial guidance extremely seriously. So we had to wait, and so did our client. But clients who make busy senior (foreign) executives available expect explanations about these kinds of things. "Hey, dude, it's China," doesn't really cut it, so we did a little poking around. The back-story is illustrative of one of the challenges of the PR biz in China. Anyone who follows current affairs in China will know that these are delicate times for discussing the topic of foreign investment. Questions are being raised about the quality of foreign investment and the intent behind it. Early last November the 11th Five Year Plan was published. It put a great deal of emphasis on the quality of foreign investment. In this English Xinhua article about the plan, the money graf --as far as we were concerned-- is the very last one: In response to the rising concern over foreign acquisitions of leading Chinese firms in critical sectors, the document says China will speed up legislation and step up the supervision of sensitive acquisitions and takeovers to ensure critical industries and enterprises remain under Chinese control. Shortly thereafter, it seems the initial guidance to treat reporting around this topic sensitively was passed on to at least some Chinese media. The publication we were dealing with was government-linked, and had little wiggle-room as far as interpreting this directive to be "sensitive". Unfortunately, apparently, they had somehow missed the memo and in their previous issue published an article that had raised eyebrows upstairs. This had resulted in a ministerial reminder to toe the line, which descended, Rumsfeldian snowflake fashion, into the in-boxes of the editors of the magazine we were working with the day before they called to tell us that they had to postpone. My initial response when the Chinese media-relations guru on my team told me that the magazine had to postpone the story because of a government directive was to assume they were giving me a polite brush-off. Similar, perhaps, to what you might get if a Western editor didn't like the story a journalist had put together on your client, and the journalist in question wanted to tell you something more polite than, "The editor thinks your interview was crap on a stick." "Are they yanking our chain?" was the first question I asked her. Some of our other Chinese team members, including one of our government relations people, had the same first reaction, so it wasn't just foreigner-itis. But after some research and phone calls turned up the story above I changed my opinion. At the very least, if it was an excuse, it was a damn well substantiated one with abundant face-saving for everyone. In which case, my face duly saved, I could sleep well at night. The net result, however, is that our story went on the back burner, where it remains until the publication feels that it can once again broach the topic of foreign investment in certain industries, or hell freezes over (whichever comes first). And now I have one more piece of due-diligence to do when identifying Chinese media to work with in future. Such is one of the many things that make PR in China such a rush. Filed under: China, PR & Media (Old)May08http://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/2251cc6cb9348105ebf48212a670dce2f/acfacf2008-06-01T16:51:41+02:00Shanghai Public_Relations PR olympics fun blog <span style="color:#555555;">William <a href="http://www.bibsonomy.org/author/Moss">Moss</a> </span><em>Imagethief (Blog)</em><em>14. August 7:17 AM20070814. </em><em>Imagethief is William Moss, a public relations professional and writer working in China since 2004. The opinions in this blog are his own, not those of his<span class="info">...<span>Imagethief is William Moss, a public relations professional and writer working in China since 2004. The opinions in this blog are his own, not those of his agency. For more information see &#196;bout Imagethief&quot;, below.</span></span> . </em>Sun Jun 01 16:51:41 CEST 2008Imagethief (Blog)14. August 7:17 AMImagethief is William Moss, a public relations professional and writer working in China since 2004. The opinions in this blog are his own, not those of his agency. For more information see "About Imagethief", below.Jim Yardley on the Olympics and politics20070814Shanghai Public_Relations PR olympics fun blog Jim Yardley, of the New York Times and International Herald Tribune, sums up the situation facing Beijing nicely in a "Letter from China" column in the IHT: [If] anything was evident last week when Beijing staged a one-year countdown to the 2008 Games, it was that eliminating politics from the Olympics was about as likely as eliminating medals. Beijing may have envisioned a public relations opportunity, but so did an array of advocacy groups that spent the week whipsawing China on human rights violations, press freedom and Tibet. If a few stunts were daring - protesters unfurled a "Free Tibet" banner on the Great Wall - the criticisms were not new. What did change was the way the Olympics amplified the dissent, even for a nonevent like the one-year countdown. Media attention intensified merely because the Olympics were in town. "All of these voices are going to become stronger and stronger, not weaker and weaker, as the Games approach," said John MacAloon, an Olympic historian who has advised the Beijing Olympic committee on managing the traditional torch relay. "All Olympic Games are, of course, highly politically charged and sensitive in some regions of the world. How could they not be?" For about as long as the modern Games have existed, they have served as a stage for politics as much as sport. Berlin 1936 was Hitler and Jesse Owens. Helsinki 1952 was the beginning of the Cold War. Mexico City 1968 was the Black Power salute. The blood of 11 slain Israeli athletes stained Munich 1972. Moscow 1980 meant boycotts, as did Los Angeles 1984. It's worth a read, and reaffirms some of the challenges I've noted here. One thing noted in this article that I've noted before is that the Olympics have essentially always been political. Step one in solving a problem is acknowledging you have one. Once Beijing reconciles itself to the idea that the Olympics will be politicized, and starts working out how to manage that as constructively as possible, its path will become smoother. Also, unremarked in the PR roundup I did for last week was that another politician, Maxine Waters of California, has floated the Olympic boycott idea (joining presidential candidate Bill Richardson). For what its worth, Imagethief thinks that is a stupendously bad idea and about as likely as sending a US team composed entirely of poodles. But ideas like that will gain more visibility in the next year. Previously (and growing by the week): Bang! China shoots its own Olympic PR in the foot Does BOCOG need to raise China's Olympic PR game? Don't politicize the Olympics? It's much too late for that... AP: China watching NGOs prior to Olympics Democratic presidential candidates kick around the Olympic boycott football Did the "Genocide Olympics" influence China? Filed under: China, Public Relations and Media, OlympicsMay08http://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/2016d2c0582918b69992324dc3397ff1c/acfacf2008-06-01T16:51:41+02:00blog public_relations PR online_PR blogging <span style="color:#555555;">Will <a href="http://www.bibsonomy.org/author/Moss">Moss</a> </span><em>Asia Perspectives</em>(<em>2008</em>)Sun Jun 01 16:51:41 CEST 2008Asia PerspectivesWild Wild East...Are you ready for online PR in China?2008blog public_relations PR online_PR blogging Companies across Asia increasingly find themselves reacting to events springing unexpectedly out of the internet. Emboldened by the new technologies at their disposal and a sense that they now have a say, people are busily swapping notes on poor quality products, second-rate customer service and a host of other opinions. But nowhere are the noise-levels higher than in China. It is the headline figures that grab your attention: 210 million users as of January, 2008, up fifty percent in a year. An instant messaging platform, QQ,that reaches eighty percent of those users. 47 million bloggers. Countless social networking and video sharing sites. And then there are the forums, the topical bulletin boards that are the heart of China’s Internet, getting about ten million new posts every day. That’s a lot to keep up with. It seems like a PR no-brainer. How can any company doing business in China afford not to use the Internet? Behind those headline numbers lurk some daunting obstacles. For one thing, although China’s absolute number of Internet users is high, overall penetration remains relatively low, at about 16 percent (although concentrated in the economically important major cities). Many people, especially students, access the Internet irregularly using shared computers at schools or Internet cafes. Unlike in the US, where a handful of heavyweight sites rule, China’s Internet market is relatively fragmented. In addition, the regulatory environment is changing by the day. New rules governing content and ownership of video sharing sites were introduced in January, and further regulatory shoes may yet drop into the midst of carefully planned online marketing programs. The challenges are real, but so are the opportunities. The trick with the Internet in China, as with anywhere else, is to be systematic. Consider where your comfort zone is, which audiences are relevant to you, and what influence they might have over mainstream media or offline audiences. Once you have a clear idea of what you want to accomplish and who you need to reach, the landscape can look a lot more manageable. Some of the key things to consider are: Listening There are literally hundreds of thousands of different topical forums in China receiving tens of millions of posts a day. Many of these are hosted on big content sites such as Douban, Tianya and Sina. Every newspaper and magazine in China also hosts forums, not to mention those affiliated with universities and such. Most of these sites don’t support RSS subscriptions, so it’s not always practical to set up an automatic dashboard. Some of the major Chinese search engines, such as Baidu, support RSS for specific searches, however, which can help. Consumer products, especially mobile phones, cars and laptop computers, are among the items most passionately discussed, making monitoring the forums is a good way to catch issues early. But they can also be a good source of insight into what people like and don’t like about your products and how they stack up against the competition. Consider it the world’s largest focus group, there to be listened in on. There are companies that do a good job using software to monitor and analyze vast swathes of the forum space. But an easy way to start can be to identify a few of the most important and active forums and to follow them manually, checking in once or twice a day to see what’s driving the conversation. Blogs are increasingly important in China, but they haven’t displaced the forums as the main form of online participation as has happened elsewhere. But as with forums, it makes good sense to do a little research to identify a few of the most influential bloggers with regard to your company or industry and to follow them. Marketing Big consumer companies are increasingly using the Internet in China for interactive marketing campaigns. Chinese users can be enthusiastic about sharing ideas and content, especially if there is an incentive involved. We’ve helped computer, food and consumer electronic firms to develop campaigns that encouraged users to submit creative ideas and judge other submissions, and otherwise participate directly. When integrated with mainstream marketing and PR these programs can be great ways to build awareness while directly engaging potential customers. The good news is that these kinds of programs rely on your fans (ideally) for content, so you don’t need to worry about recruiting hassled executives to blog. Media Relations While blogging hasn’t knocked the forums off the top of the Chinese Internet hill, there is one audience for which it has become increasingly important: Journalists. Many of China’s most influential bloggers are full-time journalists who use the Internet to express ideas and opinions that don’t always make it into official channels. One example of this is CCTV9 anchor Rui Chenggang, who in January 2006 helped seal the fate of Starbucks’ Forbidden City shop with a critical post on his blog. But it’s not only TV celebrities who are doing this, and it’s not always a crisis. Many trade journalists blog on the side. This provides an opportunity to start exploring less formal kinds of communication, making podcast or online video material available and holding specialty events just for bloggers. And don’t be shy about reaching out to influential non-journalist bloggers as well, although as elsewhere you’ll want to reach out informally to establish a rapport and ascertain interest before engaging. Some Chinese blogging engines and aggregators are now in the business of delivering widespread blog coverage on their networks for a fee. It can be a tempting offer, consolidating the legwork of identifying influencers and making personal outreach. But beware: Chinese Internet users are sophisticated, and getting good at spotting pay-for-play coverage. Nothing beats earned coverage, even in blogs. Company Blogging This is an area that is still only emerging in China. Today there are three main kinds of practitioners: Small, overseas consultancies that want to raise their profiles with analytical English blogs; Chinese branches of big technology firms; and Chinese CEOs who often blog on a mix of personal and company topics (although the two can sometimes be synonymous). For companies concerned about the investment or risks of broad based blogging, identifying a specific audience to reach out to can be a good start. Many of the technology firms running blogs in China have R&D labs here and use their blogs to reach out to the development community. We’ve done something similar for one of our software industry clients, helping to build a “group blog” on which their executives, industry analysts and journalists all contributed posts on a particular development topic. There are also companies in China that use internal blogs to reach out to employees across the nation, or even extended groups like partner networks. We expect company blogging to grow in popularity over time, as companies are discouraged from taking a direct role in forums. Those caught “seeding” forums with planted posts can be ruthlessly savaged. Copying and pasting of articles and blog posts is common in the forums, however, and having a blog is one way to take advantage of this and help your point of view to get represented. Everything Else… There is more. Video sharing is already widely popular in China, and videos are often shared in blogs and forums. Social networks are also growing in popularity, with local heavyweights such as Xiaonei, 51.com, Mop and others dominating the scene and foreign players just beginning to edge in. With all of this going on, there is no one solution to communicating on the Internet in China. But it’s growing in importance and companies operating in China need to pay attention to how discussions on the Internet can affect their reputations. After that, engagement can come one step at a time. It’s OK to start small. It’s OK to just listen. But ignore it at your peril.May08http://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/200a112a329e1803d529da2dbc249f2de/acfacf2008-06-01T16:51:41+02:00public_relations Mercedes PR bribery reputation Chinese_media media news <span style="color:#555555;"> <a href="http://www.bibsonomy.org/author/Jorvan">Jorvan</a> </span><em>Gasgoo Global Auto Sources</em><em>August2007-08-24. </em>Sun Jun 01 16:51:41 CEST 2008Gasgoo Global Auto SourcesAugustAmid bribery scandals, Beijing Benz car sales drop in July2007-08-24public_relations Mercedes PR bribery reputation Chinese_media media news Shanghai. August 24 (Gasgoo.com) - A sales manager of Beijing Benz was accused of asking for kick-backs from advertising agencies and media, according to a Chinese media report. "I have not heard of this," sadi Dong Changzhen, vice president of Beijing Benz said. "But it is a good thing to have us under social supervision." Another senior official, Ding Wen, the marketing manager of Beijing Benz, declined to make comments on this scandal. Though Beijing Benz has not made any official statement on this scandal, Benz sales record dropped significantly in July. Sales records show that China-made Benz sold 559 units in July, a decrease of 200 units compared to June. The Benz E230, which was launched at the beginning of July, sold only 171 units. In E series, E230 and E280 are two similar models in the same segment. In order to boost the sales of E230, Beijing Benz increased the price of E280 to 618,000 yuan ($82,000). The however, the sales of E280 dropped substantially, sold about 300 units in July. The president of Beijing Benz noticed that the company will make further steps to rev up the sales network and boost the sales across the country. Beijing Benz sold 3,664 units in the first seven months: 2.0L displacement vehicles sold 812 units and 3.0L displacement vehicle sold 2,884 units. It is unlikely that Beijing Benz could reach its annual sales target of 6,000 units, which means it will fall far behind its closest competitor BMW in the premium market, according to auto experts.May08http://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/2c3689569a7ab74e78347645049f863b8/acfacf2008-06-01T16:51:41+02:00corruption graft business public_relations crime bribery Electrolux PR Carrefour <span style="color:#555555;">Jeremy <a href="http://www.bibsonomy.org/author/Goldkorn">Goldkorn</a> </span><em>Danwei.org</em><em>31. Aug, 10:58 AM2007-08-31. </em>Sun Jun 01 16:51:41 CEST 2008Danwei.org31. Aug, 10:58 AMBad PR week for Western brands, or just turbulence?2007-08-31corruption graft business public_relations crime bribery Electrolux PR Carrefour This week has seen two prominent Western companies in PR hot water in China. Electrolux An assistant to a senior Electrolux executive has become an Internet celebrity after revealing photographs of her were hacked from an American man's password-protected photo website. Roland Soong has summarized the affair and translated some Chinese Internet chatter about the case: ...Beijing Youth Daily contacted Electrolux and was informed by the company public relation specialist that Shi Jing is the assistant to the manager of the home electronics division and she is presently on leave due to mental pressure. ...There are many "angry young people" among the [online] commentators and they are not very polite. Here are some comments: "The problem with Shi Jing is not that she posed nude, or she had intercourse with someone. There are so many Japanese adult video girls, but why should any normal person scold them? Shi Jing's problem was that 'she wants to look aloof in front of her compatriots, but she acts like a dog in front of foreigners'." "Let us unite all our powers and find out the true identity of this foreigner." This is similar to the Secretary PK Boss affair in April 2006, in which a strongly critical email from a Chinese secretary to her grouchy Singaporean boss was circulated nationwide. That company was EMC, a network information storage provider. It is highly unlikely that there was any effect on EMC's bottom line because of the scandal: If anything, the fuss made a lot of Chinese netizens know the name EMC. The fact is, a lot of people in China's cities can sympathize with having a grouchy Singaporean boss, or a Chinese secretary who looks like a flower but turns into a vixen when vexed. Carrefour From Forbes: French hypermarket Carrefour is facing a peculiar kind of growing pain for its breakneck growth in China: systemic corruption among its management ranks at the local levels. As many as eight managerial staff at Carrefour China have been detained by Chinese police in a wide-ranging probe initiated by the company itself over bribe taking by its managers at its city procurement center in Beijing and seven other outlets, including one in Shenzhen... ...The police summoned 22 suspects for questioning between June 25th and August 1, including 12 local suppliers, according to two major publications, Shanghai Securities News and China Business News. The investigation netted an unidentified number of corrupt managers working at the fresh produce department who requested kickbacks in the form of promotional fees from suppliers. Carrefour did not dispute the reports... ...A report published by China Business News in February last year revealed the value of kickbacks for a procurement manager working at a Carrefour outlet, who earned a monthly salary of 3,000 yuan ($397) but managed to top this up to more than a million yuan ($132,000) every year by devising some innovative forms of bribery such as the acceptance of credit cards, lottery prizes and payments made in exchange for hosting promotional campaigns. While the Western press is carefully noting that Carrefour itself initiated the investigation, that point is not given much play in the Chinese reports; most of Beijing's morning newspapers reported on the case today. Seems like bad PR for Carrefour, but it also recalls a similar scandal in January this year, when Shanghai police detained 22 company executives for bribery and graft. The authorities said at the time that "bribes worth 4 million yuan (US$514,000) allegedly were given to staff at seven companies by local computer network operators, in return for equipment orders" (see China Daily story). The companies named included consulting firm McKinsey & Co., McDonald's, Swiss engineering firm ABB Ltd. and American appliances maker Whirlpool Corp., among other companies. At the time of the arrests, your correspondent did some research on behalf of one of the affected companies about the PR fallout and especially the online chatter about the affair. These were some of my conclusions at the time: Some people think that such corruption is a normal part of business and life in China and that there is nothing special about this case. Such people do not approve of this type of behavior, but recognize that is is really common in China. Many bloggers said that corruption is part of the unspoken rules of business and society, but criticized it as an impediment to the growth and development of China. There seems to be nobody blaming the companies affected, nor attaching negative associations to them because of the scandal. ========================================================== Comments on Bad PR week for Western brands, or just turbulence? 1. Add this to the list: - Amid bribery scandals, Beijing Benz car sales drop in July. http://www.gasgoo.com/autobiz/3056/Amid-bribery-scandals-Beijing-Benz-car-sales-drop-in-July.html Posted by: Shaan | August 31, 2007 3:11 PM 2. Very intelligently presented: you offer two sets of two cases, ostensibly on the theme of PR fallout. In so doing, you've also conveniently juxtaposed the public reaction to a legal personal relationship (outrage - set 1, case 1) with the reaction to an illegal commercial relationship (crickets chirping - set 2, case 2). So, let me turn it around on you and ask: How do you interpret the striking contrast in the reactions to these two incidents? I'm perfectly happy to get both of us in trouble. Allow me to add that I think there's more going on here than simply a protectionist attitude regarding 'our women', if you will. That aspect may well exist, but doesn't seem sufficient as an explanation. To me, it seems more interesting than that. Cheers ps Were you a troublemaker before coming to China? Posted by: Du Yisa | August 31, 2007 3:42 PM 3. Hmmm... a young women agrees to pose nude - foolishly certainly - for a foreigner alas! - but doubt she was paid money to do so, so seems a private issue between her and the total dork that she did this for, feel sorry for her, and then you tie this in with Carrefour, which is SO completely relevant... are you seriously finding a tie in to this? what the f*** do they have to do with each other? Anyhow, EVERYONE who lives and works here understands that total corruption on every level if possible is the name of the business game in China, so why bother even commenting on it? Yawn.... Sinking their own good ship, much to the disadvantage of some very decent, honest people here, welcome to China! But ah, they don't usually own things....But this is something that Chinese themselves will have to find a way out of. Domestic economy aside, all the money in China is mostly coming from outside through direct trade and investment. Personally I think the gov't will deal with it, central control might be the saving grace - a few more executions!! - but when you have society with no spiritual rules, and that has jumped into the emptiness of modern society overnight... anyone surprised? A personal opinion... anyone who shops at a French supermarket is daft anyhow. Even though I am European I would say buy AMERICAN or German any day. Bought so much complete garbage at Carrefour, everything fell apart in seconds. The LOWEST quality I have found here in this lovely country. Posted by: So who's to blame? | September 3, 2007 12:10 AMMay08http://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/264d5e9da5e84169f04fd867682270981/acfacf2008-06-01T16:51:41+02:00crisis_management MNCs crisis PR public_relations <span style="color:#555555;">Douglas <a href="http://www.bibsonomy.org/author/Dew">Dew</a> </span><em>Asiaperspective</em><em>Autumn2005. </em><em>Director and Practice Leader, Public Affairs Practice, Burson-Marsteller Beijing . </em>Sun Jun 01 16:51:41 CEST 2008AsiaperspectiveAutumnDirector and Practice Leader, Public Affairs Practice, Burson-Marsteller BeijingCommunications in practice - China Crisis Management: Interesting Times for Foreign Multinationals in the PRC?2005crisis_management MNCs crisis PR public_relations COMMUNICATIONS IN PRACTICE China Crisis Management: Interesting Times for Foreign Multinationals in the PRC? By Douglas Dew, Director and Practice Leader, Public Affairs Practice, Burson-Marsteller Beijing Chinese stakeholders and influential media have been heralding a “reputation crisis for foreign multinational companies” (MNCs) in Mainland China after what appears to be an unprecedented number of major crisis situations since 2004 and an apparent lowering of trust in foreign business. One of the nation’s leading business publications spoke recently of “countless evidence” of MNC problems - ranging from “MNC attitude” to product quality debacles. Meanwhile, there is a sense among some representatives of foreign business that times are changing with, in some ways, greater challenges for foreign MNCs to demonstrate responsibility and accountability. As a result, rigorous crisis and issues management capabilities are now high or, perhaps, higher on the priority list for many global companies and foreign businesses. And if they are not, they absolutely should be. A Hardening in Attitudes to MNCs? There is conjecture that there has been a hardening in attitudes to foreign MNCs in the PRC in the past three years and that increasing ambivalence may partly explain the huge number of crises and issues management situations facing MNCs. These crises and issues have spanned a wide range of industries including automotive, healthcare, cosmetics, food and nutrition, chemicals and plastics, technology and electronics, and energy and resources. In fact, no industry is immune, with many of the world’s leading brands and companies finding themselves in crisis mode for extended periods, with very significant financial and business consequences. These situations have fed into intense debate over MNC corporate responsibility and accountability in the Chinese media, and within the Chinese government. Issues and allegations have included serious environmental contamination and degradation incidents, major product quality and safety lapses, cultural insensitivities, corruption and ethics breaches, monopolistic practices, labor and consumer rights violations - among a host of others - with overarching suggestions that some MNCs apply “double standards” to China. With “attitude” a key concern for local stakeholders, foreign companies are being accused of arrogance, being patronizing and domineering, of being insensitive to or simply not understanding the local context. Examples include major technology MNCs accused of trying to block or contain China in regards to intellectual property and standards (to perpetuate market dominance and dependency of local companies), allegations that certain MNCs have not made the same efforts to protect Chinese consumers they would make in the ‘rich’ countries of Europe and the United States, that MNCs are “exporting pollution” to China and have used what was considered “culturally offensive” advertising. These concerns are especially acute at this time of year - with the annual meeting of the National People’s Congress (China’s legislature with thousands of delegates from around the country traveling to the capital Beijing) and National Consumers Day; both in March. These two very different events provide highly public platforms for scrutiny of MNCs. Reality Check But what is the reality? Are foreign companies innocent victims of the times, or are they simply being called on to match more closely the standards they themselves espouse and claim to adhere to globally? Has there been a genuine shift in attitudes to MNCs that is contributing to more issues and crisis? What factors are driving this? And, importantly, what can MNCs do to adapt to and thrive in this changing environment? As you might expect, there are no simple answers. However, I would like to get one thing straight before we move on: there are abundant examples of genuine problems. And I am certainly not attempting here to explain away serious issues or make excuses for companies that have failed in their obligations to society. I would also caution against a sense of victimization on the part of MNCs, which is neither supported by the facts nor productive. Indeed, judging by the continuing success of foreign companies in China, it would be hard to argue that China is not, in fact, a good place for business. In fact, most foreign executives are effusive in their praise for China and the overall operating environment here, if not in every aspect. It is clear though that several interrelated factors have driven and continue to drive the importance of crisis and issues management for MNCs, including: Increased concern and emphasis on a range of issues from health and the environment, to labor and consumer rights, with greater pressure on Chinese government authorities to be “people-centric” in line with the overarching Communist Party theme of a Harmonious Society (key concept for President Hu Jintao’s administration) and for foreign companies to adhere to higher standards of corporate responsibility and accountability. Greater domestic self-confidence and emphasis on local development and self-reliance, with the emergence of Chinese MNCs and China’s climb up the global industrial value chain; pitting Chinese interests against foreign MNCs in more direct competition than in the past, and making foreign investment less vital. Continuing concerns about foreign dominance and allegedly “monopolistic practices” in certain sectors, as China opens further in line with WTO commitments. Increasing focus on intangible contributions made by MNCs as China pursues a more “scientific approach to development”, favoring quality over quantity. This raises the bar for MNCs with simple economic contributions less relevant to China’s current goals. A complex and fast-evolving regulatory environment, with an array of government agencies and levels of government to consider. Coupled with absent or unclear regulations and standards in certain areas, this makes it challenging in some cases to demonstrate accountability. Evolving media and Internet dynamics - with foreign companies fair-game for an increasingly aggressive domestic media. Digital and user generated media are also playing a greater role in triggering and inflaming issues and crisis, as Chinese Internet use explodes and global issues travel at net speed to China. Lack of strategic understanding of and in interest in public policy dynamics and the evolving development and regulatory agenda - combined with inadequate stakeholder relations and outreach for some MNCs. Lack of effective crisis management and government relations capabilities for many foreign MNCs in China (who may not have faced such challenges in the past), as well as unclear responsibilities and reporting lines to headquarters. This is leading in some cases to inappropriate responses that escalate a situation from bad to worse – with the handling of the crisis becoming the actual crisis. A Knowledge-Driven Strategic Approach So what should MNCs do – besides adhering to high standards of corporate conduct and responsibility in China? While many factors are out of the control of individual companies or organizations, there is much than can be done to prepare for a crisis, to build organizational capacity and improve the overall competitive context and operating environment. This requires a knowledge-driven, strategic approach to stakeholder outreach; a commitment from the most senior company leadership; a well-resourced public affairs function and an ability to clearly articulate both the quantitative and qualitative contributions a company is making to the evolving Chinese development agenda. Consider the following: The development and testing of tailored crisis management plans that take a “total stakeholder” approach to crises; dealing with the myriad stakeholders that have to be communicated with in a very short period, including employees, partners, suppliers, customers, distributors, third-party opinion leaders in addition to government and regulators. Conducting a public affairs risk assessment - before a decision is made to move forward. For instance, careful evaluation before taking out a lawsuit against a leading local company; closing a major facility or taking public position on a controversial topic in China. A proactive corporate reputation or “good will” building program demonstrating relevance and alignment with local goals, such as those defined in the Chinese Government’s 11th Five Year Plan. * The development and implementation of an integrated public affairs and communications campaign to address an issue before it becomes a crisis, or to repair the damage of a past one - in terms of China’s self interest. Reduction of internal functional silos to minimize disconnects that lead to decision-making that gets a company in to unnecessary trouble with various stakeholders. Enhancement of a government relations capability or allocation of more senior company leadership time to public policy and public affairs issues. Build partnerships with local stakeholders who can provide 3rd party endorsement and advocacy and may have higher credibility than an MNC with local audiences, when it comes to certain issues. Stakeholder mapping and public policy analysis on a particular issue or priority area to build institutional knowledge and awareness. Proactive stakeholder engagement and dialogue on key issues to influence the debate, to better understand the opportunities and risks, and to arrive at mutually acceptable ‘win-win’ solutions …. In changing and uncertain times, the overall messages for MNCs are clear – to think global and local, and above all, be prepared. For more information on how to conduct business and build and protect a successful reputation in China, contact Douglas at email: Douglas.Dew@bm.com * Note: The Five Year Plan was recently renamed The Five Year Development Guidelines to reflect an evolving development mindset and a continuing shift away from the central planning model used in the past. And MNCs that truly want to understand their relevance and the value of their contribution to China’s goals now more than ever need to be able to think in developmental terms. It is of course important to remember that China is in fact a developing country and thus looks at MNCs in terms of the value they offer, and whether they are in any way an impediment, to China’s development, both collectively and on an individual basis. From Deng Xiaoping’s initial Opening and Reform policy, when foreign technology and investment were seen as key catalysts for growth, to the current focus on building a Harmonious Society, China has had, and has, a clear idea for the role to be played by MNCs. That said, there is of course a spectrum of views within the Party and government on this topic at any one time, reflecting different interests and focus, evolving priorities and ideological standpoints.May08http://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/2f407bf44fe4d9a884b3eefb2f19ddc94/acfacf2008-06-01T16:51:41+02:00corruption law PR blog public_relations <span style="color:#555555;"> <a href="http://www.bibsonomy.org/author/Dan">Dan</a> </span><em>China Law Blog</em><em>January 28, 2007 at 08:40 PM2007-01-28. </em>Sun Jun 01 16:51:41 CEST 2008China Law BlogJanuary 28, 2007 at 08:40 PMThe Steep Price of China Public Relations2007-01-28corruption law PR blog public_relations My father in law managed a small town newspaper all of his working life. He loves to tell how when his son in law got picked up for some sort of small offense (I am not trying to save anyone here, but it was so inconsequential I truly do not remember what it was) the newspaper ran the story and my father in law made absolutely no effort to intervene. His own son in law's arrest always allowed him to tell everyone who would call him to beg for keeping unflattering news out of the paper that he had not even blocked bad news on his own. Many years ago, I was working on a big case in the United States for a thriving U.S. based company owned by Russians. Our lawsuit was against a Russian company. Early in the case, my client came to me with a newspaper article from a fairly reputable Russian (as in Russia) newspaper. The article was on the company we were suing and it contained pretty much all of the facts we would need to prove our case in the United States. I suggested to my client we immediately contact the reporter to speak with him about where he had gotten the information for his story so we could do likewise. My client coolly replied no call would be necessary because he already knew. Smart client, I thought. Naive me. My client already knew where the reporter had obtained the information because my client had fed all of this information, along with $500, to the reporter and the reporter had printed it. My client had done this in the mistaken belief we would be able to use the article as evidence in our case. Bad case strategy, but good public relations. Much has been written of late how reporters in China go both ways with payments. They not only take money for favorable press coverage, they seek money from people with the threat that if they do not pay, true (or untrue) bad press will follow. The Washington Post did an excellent article on this the other day, entitled, "Blackmailing By Journalists In China Seen As 'Frequent'," and it got me to wondering what foreign companies should do when the media in China knocks on the door. But before I finished, I got my answer from a post on the Silicon Hutong and the answer is don't: There's only one way to avoid this: Repeat after me: "No matter what my PR people, my PR agency, or anyone else tells me, OUR COMPANY WILL NEVER PAY FOR COVERAGE, either directly or indirectly." Say it. Live it. Stick to it. Or be prepared to spend ever-increasing sums of money buying off the jackals. I am not a media guy, but this advice is so similar to what I am always saying about paying bribes (and media payouts are essentially bribes) that I just have to agree. And if you are going to disagree, please at least read the entire post over at Silicon Hutong first. Update: China PR guru, Will Moss, over at ImageThief, calls Silicon Hutong's advice on this "very sound."May08http://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/23d19cb8559ea2e69953314746e5a0294/acfacf2008-06-01T16:51:41+02:00PR Public_Relations MNC multinational_companies globalization PR&media <span style="color:#555555;">Justin <a href="http://www.bibsonomy.org/author/Chan">Chan</a> </span><em>Insight</em><em>April2008. </em>Sun Jun 01 16:51:41 CEST 2008InsightApril37-41The Public Relations Machine2008PR Public_Relations MNC multinational_companies globalization PR&media Murray King, Shanghai managing directo for APCO Worldwide, a global communciations consultancy. "The business practices of multinational companies (MNCs) and their relevance to China's own development objectives have come under increasing scrutiny in the last few years." "With so much attention being paid to how companies are operating across business, economic and social contexts, a finely tuned pubic relations strategy is needed to uphold corporate reputations and ensure that the proper message is being communicated to multiple stakeholders, around the world, at all times." 1990ies - int. PR companies arrive in China first strategy: reach out to Chinese consumers - Press releases, - conduct press briefings - arrange interviews - place articleshttp://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/285c7ea14866bd16b068a956784deeda2/acfacf2008-05-04T04:10:01+02:00medgov MBA localization public_relations case_study PR internet marketing globalization <span style="color:#555555;">Y. <a href="http://www.bibsonomy.org/author/Tian">Tian</a> </span><em>International Journal</em><em>11(1):13--22</em>(<em>2006</em>)Sun May 04 04:10:01 CEST 2008International Journal113--22{Communicating with local publics: a case study of Coca-Cola’s Chinese web site}112006medgov MBA localization public_relations case_study PR internet marketing globalization Department of Communication, University of Missouri-St Louis, St Louis,Missouri, USA Purpose – This is a case study of Coca-Cola’s Chinese web site. It aims to examine how Coca-Cola,the number one brand in the world, is using its web site to communicate with the publics in the world’s largest market. design/methodology/approach – Uses a qualitative text analysis. Findings – Coca-Cola is practicing a “glocal” strategy, which integrates the ethnocentric and polycentric model in international public relations, to communicate with the Chinese publics through its Chinese web site. Originality/value – This study provides insights for understanding the theory and practice of global corporate public relations. http://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/2d57bfb81ad9a575f5e0495741c4223d8/acfacf2008-05-04T04:10:01+02:00Krisenkommunikation crisis medgov public_relations MBA internet PR <span style="color:#555555;">K. <a href="http://www.bibsonomy.org/author/Fjeld">Fjeld</a> and M. <a href="http://www.bibsonomy.org/author/Molesworth">Molesworth</a> </span><em>International Journal</em><em>11(4):391--405</em>(<em>2006</em>)Sun May 04 04:10:01 CEST 2008International Journal4391--405{PR practitioners’ experiences of, and attitudes towards, the internet’s contribution to external crisis communication}112006Krisenkommunikation crisis medgov public_relations MBA internet PR http://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/2443f8acbc128bcde8242de81bd9e24c6/acfacf2008-04-29T07:57:13+02:00public_relations agenda_setting PR <span style="color:#555555;">L.M. <a href="http://www.bibsonomy.org/author/Zoch">Zoch</a> and J.C. <a href="http://www.bibsonomy.org/author/Molleda">Molleda</a> </span><em>Public Relations Theory II</em>(<em>2006</em>) <em>zitiert von Kiousis et.al . </em>Tue Apr 29 07:57:13 CEST 2008Public Relations Theory IIzitiert von Kiousis et.al279--309{Building a Theoretical Model of Media Relations Using Framing, Information Subsidies, and Agenda-Building}2006public_relations agenda_setting PR http://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/2f2dcbdd1a7ea5400045f6350ab0e3054/acfacf2008-04-29T07:57:13+02:00PR <span style="color:#555555;">S.U. <a href="http://www.bibsonomy.org/author/Yang">Yang</a> </span><em>Journal of Public Relations Research</em><em>19(2):91--121</em>(<em>2007</em>)Tue Apr 29 07:57:13 CEST 2008Journal of Public Relations Research291--121{An Integrated Model for Organization-Public Relational Outcomes, Organizational Reputation, and Their Antecedents}192007PR This study is to test a theoretical model regarding the effect of organization - public relationships on organizational reputation. Grounded in multidisciplinary literature, this study proposed that organization - public relational outcomes are hypothesized to influence organizational reputation, considering the exogenous influences of communication behaviors, experience, and familiarity that the research participants hold of the organizations studied. The proposed model illustrated tenable data-model fits, and most of the hypotheses were statistically supported. The key finding of the research includes that, across all organizations studied, organization - public relational outcomes were associated positively with favorable reputation of the organizations studied. Limitations and suggestions for the future research were discussed.http://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/2964e30f6f7539b4ee5edf5de6f625512/acfacf2008-04-29T07:57:13+02:00public_relations corporate_image PR <span style="color:#555555;">H.H. <a href="http://www.bibsonomy.org/author/Wan">Wan</a> and R. <a href="http://www.bibsonomy.org/author/Schell">Schell</a> </span><em>Journal of Public Relations Research</em><em>19(1):25--45</em>(<em>2007</em>)Tue Apr 29 07:57:13 CEST 2008Journal of Public Relations Research125--45{Reassessing Corporate Image-An Examination of How Image Bridges Symbolic Relationships With Behavioral Relationships}192007public_relations corporate_image PR In this study we examine corporate image by identifying how image congruency might exert an impact on a public's beliefs, attitudes, and behavioral intentions toward an organization in a time of crisis for that organization. An experiment was conducted to test the research questions, and the results of the study revealed that a corporation that presented image congruency with a public's expectations could maintain public approval when there was no crisis. In the event of a crisis, however, image congruency might also protect the company via an indirect route. Given image congruency, a public's behavioral intentions toward the corporation seemed to remain consistent regardless of situational changes.http://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/2f2d5058f3946699c2d2c71847967a314/acfacf2008-04-29T07:57:13+02:00internal_communication public_relations PR communication_strategies <span style="color:#555555;">N. <a href="http://www.bibsonomy.org/author/McCown">McCown</a> </span><em>Journal of Public Relations Research</em><em>19(1):47--68</em>(<em>2007</em>)Tue Apr 29 07:57:13 CEST 2008Journal of Public Relations Research147--68{The Role of Public Relations With Internal Activists}192007internal_communication public_relations PR communication_strategies Within the context of benefits/outsourcing reviews at a small, Eastern U.S. college, this qualitiative case study examined potential internal activism, employee/organizational leadership communication strategies, and ensuing changes in internal public relations practices/structure. Findings revealed that employees implemented activist strategies in response to perceived communication gaps, prompting organizational leadership to increase solictiation of employee input and commit to ongoing, two-way symmetrical communication; structural changes in internal public relations practices and reporting relationships also resulted. Extending previous activism research findings to internal publics as activists, in this study I suggest that the prodrome of potential employee activism should inform future public relations practice.http://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/23a24065bdf052790bf4d06056a1fe63c/acfacf2008-04-29T07:57:13+02:00PR reputation performance <span style="color:#555555;">S. <a href="http://www.bibsonomy.org/author/Kiousis">Kiousis</a> and C. <a href="http://www.bibsonomy.org/author/Popescu">Popescu</a> and M. <a href="http://www.bibsonomy.org/author/Mitrook">Mitrook</a> </span><em>Journal of Public Relations Research</em><em>19(2):147--165</em>(<em>2007</em>)Tue Apr 29 07:57:13 CEST 2008Journal of Public Relations Research2147--165{Understanding Influence on Corporate Reputation: An Examination of Public Relations Efforts, Media Coverage, Public Opinion, and Financial Performance From an Agenda-Building and Agenda-Setting Perspective}192007PR reputation performance Seeking to extend research on public relations evaluation, this study investigates the influence of public relations efforts and media coverage on corporate reputation and financial performance through the theoretical grounding of first- and second-level agenda-building and agenda-setting. A triangulation of research methods compared public relations content, news media coverage, public opinion, and corporate financial performance for 28 U.S. companies from the annual Harris Interactive (2005) Reputation Quotient. Evidence for agenda-building and agenda-setting propositions was found, which work to inform strategies of public relations practitioners. The implications of the findings are discussed.