It was one year ago today a former college professor emailed me about an internship opportunity at an integrated consumer marketing agency in Minneapolis.

The hiring process was fairly unconventional: Submit a resume, per usual, but along with it, a three-minute video cover letter. If you make it through interviews, show off your social media chops by earning the most Likes for your video cover letter via Facebook. Winner gets the gig.

Long story short, I didn’t arrive at Fast Horse through a traditional hiring process. (I probably wouldn’t have been hired if that was the case.) We just recently launched the 2011 Summer Intern Search, which has me thinking a lot about the boatloads of talent graduating college this spring, on the verge of entering the marketing and public relations world. My experience may have been unique, but I still think there’s plenty to be taken for those just starting the job hunt:

Don’t sell yourself short
Reading newspaper headlines, you’d think the meager American job market has taken unemployed college grads hostage. If you can find a job — take it, right? Not necessarily. It’s important to know your first job probably won’t be your last, but that doesn’t mean you should settle for something that’s clearly a poor fit. When you’re applying for jobs, ask yourself, “Could I spend two years here?” Think of your first job as the chance to adjust to the rigors of a full-time job. It’s a totally different ball game.

Professional development over income
Don’t let money dictate the jobs you pursue. Instead, consider professional development opportunities. What I knew about marketing and public relations before starting at Fast Horse could’ve fit in a shot glass. Here, I have been given chances to try and, sometimes, fail, all with the space and understanding I can learn and grow and do it better next time. You can take agency in your own professional development by seeking out mentors and continuing your college education, but nothing beats on-the-job training and a place that embraces trial and error. Although, a respectable income is nice, too.

It is who you know
Had I not stayed in touch with my college professor, I probably never would’ve discovered the Fast Horse internship opportunity. Make it a habit to recognize your mentors and understand the power of relationships and network and blah blah blah — I’m not saying anything you don’t know. However, there was a time after college where I saw relying on who I knew as a weakness. If I was going to get a job, I wanted to land it on my own merit. Now, I view my relationships as a testament to my abilities. Don’t be stubborn and go it alone. Be aware of the people who can vouch for you when an opportunity arises.

It’s not just who you know, though
Sure, knowing the right person might move the needle just enough to get you hired somewhere, but at some point, you have to show your worth. Know your skill set and and utilize your strengths. Recognize your shortcomings and look for opportunities to improve them. Project yourself as someone who brings a desirable set of skills, but will still jump at every opportunity to learn something new.

You might have heard the story — reported by USA Today and given even more legs by Business Insider and several other outlets — about the big-PR firm execs who were “busted” doing, well, their job. Former CNBC news anchor Jim Goldman and former political columnist John Mercurio aren’t exactly saints, but the substance of the criticism of the two seems off-base.

Yes, it’s a crafty form of hardball to pitch stories that tear down a competitor rather than build up a client, but sometimes high-level PR can be a dirty game. (Fortunately, the type of work we do and clients we have at Fast Horse, we spend much more time on the friendly, positive side of things, and media relations is but a part of what we do.) And in refusing to disclose the company or organization for which they were working, the PR pros are definitely on the wrong side of the Public Relations Society of America’s code of ethics, if that sort of thing means anything to you (emphasis mine):

DISCLOSURE OF INFORMATION: Open communication fosters informed decision making in a democratic society.
Intent: To build trust with the public by revealing all information needed for responsible decision making.
Guidelines: A member shall:

• Be honest and accurate in all communications.
• Act promptly to correct erroneous communications for which the member is responsible.
• Investigate the truthfulness and accuracy of information released on behalf of those represented.
• Reveal the sponsors for causes and interests represented.
• Disclose financial interest (such as stock ownership) in a client’s organization.
• Avoid deceptive practices.

But in the stories I read, neither of those items gets much criticism. Instead, the focus is on two points:

• the PR pros in question were spreading lies, and
• the PR pros’ position as “high-profile media figures,” as USA Today described them

On the lying: USA Today and Business Insider — and probably many of the other outlets rehashing this story — mention that these PR pros were spreading lies about Google in this “whisper campaign” (which, by the way, really just seems like a fairly standard media relations effort, albeit negative). “After Goldman’s pitch proved largely untrue, he subsequently declined USA TODAY’s requests for comment,” the paper wrote. But there’s no explanation of exactly what’s untrue or how that’s the case. Rather, it seems like they’re dealing information that’s highly debatable, information that makes accusations with some support but that isn’t quite proven. That’s a hell of a lot different than “untrue.”

On their positions as “high-profile media figures”: Remember my description from the second sentence of this post? “Former.” They’re both former high-profile media figures. They both now work for a giant, well-known PR firm. Therefore, it’s not a scandal to be caught shaping how a story unfolds in the media. In fact, it’s their job.

UPDATE at 10 a.m. on 5/12: Writing for the Daily Beast, Dan Lyons came up with an article on this matter that’s well-reported and clarifies much of the gray area around this story. Among other things, he found that Facebook is the unnamed client who hired the PR guns to take shots at Google, and he actually points out the specific claims USA Today called “untrue.” Quoting the blogger who initially exposed the PR guys’ efforts, they’re not really “untrue” so much as they are “making a mountain out of a molehill.” Again, big difference.

[photo courtesy of captainslack on Flickr]

About three years ago, we became the first agency in America (we’re pretty sure) to ditch the typical website in favor of a blog. The Idea Peepshow was born. We figured if we’re going to make content and non-traditional marketing our core proposition, we might as well walk the walk with our own web site.

We can proudly say that in the ensuing years, long after many agencies many times our size abandoned their well-intention blogs, ours remains stronger than ever. We’ve gone from 10 to 20 unique visitors a day when we had a traditional web site, to averaging around 300 per day as dedicated bloggers. Our posts have been featured on sites as diverse as Minnesota Public Radio, TechCrunch, the SportingNews.com, MinnPost.com, Romenesko, Gannett Blog, The Heavy Table and many other influential news and opinion outlets.

In short, we’ve been able to build broad national awareness and deepen engagement in ways agencies many times our size have not.

Over the past couple weeks, observant Peepers began to notice that we’ve redesigned the Idea Peepshow. But behind the Peepshow blog is where you’ll see the bulk of our work over the past several months. Click on the depiction of our building on the upper right hand corner, and you’ll find yourself on the doorstep of our world.

At long last, this is intended to be the definitive answer to a question we hear daily: “What exactly do you guys do?”

Let us know what you think. We’d love your feedback as we continue to fine-tune our new site.

Editor’s note: This is John Reinan’s weekly marketing column for MinnPost.com. To see the original, go to http://bit.ly/aXHLDs.

The opening of Target Field is undoubtedly one of the most successful product launches in recent memory. And make no mistake, it truly is a product– a $545 million product that will generate untold millions in revenue for the Twins throughout its lifetime.

If you’ve been to the new ballpark, as I have, you know that the praise for Target Field is well earned. The team got pretty much everything right, from the biggest things to the smallest. (Although I’ve heard a few complaints about the bathrooms from men, who are shocked to be waiting in line at a sporting event. Women everywhere are laughing.)

Every aspect of the ballpark has been analyzed from every angle, and the media coverage from Twin Cities print and broadcast outlets to date would have cost hundreds of thousands of dollars if purchased as advertising space.

The Target Field launch reminds me of a saying from my favorite editor. “Writing is like making a salad,” she’d say. “You can’t take wilted lettuce and make it taste great by covering it up with a fancy dressing. And you can’t take lousy reporting and make it into a great story with fancy writing.”

Her point applies to the marketing business, too. As I tell my clients, it’s always easier to sell if you’ve got a great product. Target Field is a great product, and although the coverage may strike some as excessive, you can bet the media interest would have died down by now if the stadium had been a dud.

By the same token, media coverage in general is a lot harder to earn these days than it was even a few short years ago. Most print media have seen staff cuts of at least 30 percent in the last three years; many print publications have cut their news staffs by 40 or 50 percent.

TV and radio news staffs haven’t been exempt from the cuts, either– they’re just not as self-revealing as print. You won’t ever hear Diana Pierce mention the latest cuts at KARE-11 on the 5 p.m. newscast, but they’ve cut plenty.

When massive media cutbacks began in the Twin Cities, I thought it might lower the bar for coverage. The media might be so demoralized and stretched so thin that they’d grab any story pitch you shoveled at them, just to keep the wheels turning.

To their credit, it hasn’t played out that way. If anything, they’re even more selective. A few years ago, a reporter on a slow day might have listened to an OK pitch and followed up on it, just because she didn’t have anything more pressing right at the moment.

Not any more. Everyone is so busy that they’ve really got to pay attention to where they’re using their resources. Getting media coverage for a company, event or product these days is more challenging than ever, and only the best will get through the door.

I’m fortunate to have some great clients who do interesting things and produce excellent products. My batting average on story pitches is pretty good. But there’s no doubt that the media carnage of recent years has made things tougher on people like me– which only underscores just how terrific Target Field really is.

The Federal Trade Commission raised quite a stink a few months ago when it released its new guides governing endorsements and testimonials, which the commission itself said would “affect testimonial advertisements, bloggers [and] celebrity endorsements.”

I’m co-presenting at the next Minnesota Interactive Marketing Association event, a discussion about ethics around social media marketing. As you might imagine, this broad topic of endorsements and disclosure looms large. My wingman for this gig — Michael Fleming, a bright lawyer from Larkin Hoffman — sees a lot of people who are confused on the matter.

That confusion starts with people, like the writer of the TechDirt post I linked to above and so many others (myself included), mistaking the guides from the FTC as new “rules” or “laws” regulating marketing and advertising. I’m sure the FTC’s use of the word “governing” didn’t help the matter, but Fleming points out the FTC has issued guidelines, not regulations.

If you get taken to court, accused of not properly disclosing a financial relationship with a blogger, the FTC’s guidelines will be one of many factors the court would consider. That’s it. (I’ll leave it at that because I’m not a lawyer and I am more interested in getting to my point than in executing an exhaustive and precise legal discussion. But I welcome clarification or elaboration from Fleming or anyone else who knows more about the subject.)

Of course, those guidelines will have a fair amount of weight in court — more weight than you and your Twitter friends — but they’re not the same as laws. That revelation was a relief to me, as a marketer. I don’t envision a situation in which I’m likely to fall on the wrong side of these FTC guides, but it’s damn good to know that, beyond the questions these guides raise, there’s room for reason and, I presume, a chance to defend those who have acted in good faith. As Fleming told me, the courts will be the ultimate arbiter on matters of what’s right and wrong here, not the FTC, and marketers have some room to learn more and make a case before the legal hammer comes crashing down on anyone.

I told you all of that mumbo-jumbo to tell you this: There’s a lot of trail left to blaze in the world of blogger relations, endorsements, product sample-sending and the like, and it’s going to be a while before we have some case law and some case studies to provide direction more concrete than “use your best judgment.”

PRNewser points out an interesting comment from a New York Times story about “mommy blogs.” From PRNewser:

…Tiffany Romero [is] co-founder of Secret is in the Sauce, a community of 5,000 female bloggers. Romero recently told attendees at a conference to let PR firms know that they don’t work for free.”Your time and your experience and your audience are worth something…It’s capitalism, plain and simple,” she said. The gist: we expect to be rewarded when we write about your product or company. Whether or not disclosure is a part of the exchange, the comments are an alarming recommendation.

I don’t consider it alarming. I consider it insightful. When conducting media or blogger outreach, a marketer’s job is not to “get the client free coverage.” The job is to understand what makes a reporter, blogger, editor, producer or whomever tick, to know how you can help her do her job, and to know how her interests align with those of your client.

Sometimes we work with people whose job is to report news and interesting developments in an industry and meeting a deadline or filling some column inches. Sometimes that job — or maybe it’s a “job” — is sharing stuff that’s intriguing on a much more personal level for the writer and, with any luck, feeding a family in the process. In the latter case, there’s no reason to be alarmed by the idea of bloggers desiring to make money.

If they refuse to make the appropriate disclosures, don’t work with them. If you’re not comfortable with money changing hands, you’ll have little trouble finding other bloggers to work with — assuming you have information worthy of their attention. There’s no need for any sort of James Bond stuff, sneaking around in the dark with some shady characters. And if openly disclosed pay-per-post coverage is something you’re interested in, go for it. It sounds like Tiffany Romero has some friends you can talk to.

[photo]

As for the second opening?  Well, let’s just say we’re casting a very wide net for new talent. This would be an investment hire (or two) based solely on the need to keep our bench deep as we continue to grow.  Talented people get absorbed quickly around here, and we are always looking for marketers who bring new ideas and experiences to our shop.  Perhaps you’re an account planner looking for a new opportunity.  An interactive developer searching for more interesting projects.  A social media maven eager for a bigger stage.  A creative director ready to take it to the next level. A media relations expert ready for a new adventure. All of the above?  When can you start?  Our list of services can be found here.  Take a gander and tell us how you think you can help us continue our momentum. We’ll create a position if we can find a superstar to fill it.

We value initiative, a sense of humor and curiosity.  Our culture is loose, flexible and extremely fast-paced.  Sound like a place where you or someone you know could thrive? Please direct resumes to Jorg Pierach at info@fasthorseinc.com. In the meantime, we’ll start a discussion tab about our latest talent search at the Fast Horse Experience on facebook. Join us there if you have questions or ideas about where we might find great candidates.

As long as cameras have been small enough to stuff inside a duffel bag, a suitcase or a pocket, they’ve been used to expose actions people would probably rather have kept private. In most of those cases, there’s a PR team somewhere working hard to earn their paychecks — or perhaps reconsidering their career paths.

A recent video from Mercy for Animals is the next in a long line of hidden-camera exposés in which the struggle between big business and little animals is thrust into the sunlight. MFA has made a splash with its hidden-camera video from a hatchery in Iowa. (WARNING: It’s incredibly unpleasant to watch, no matter your feelings on the matter of raising animals for food. Seriously.) Among other nastiness, the video depicts the hatchery’s young male birds being tossed into a grinder, meeting their immediate demise.

Happy Monday.

There’s an important communication lesson here. For PR pros who might one day find themselves in a position of needing to defend some ethically questionable practices, this illustrates the importance of planning for a crisis. You need to be prepared to respond. You might not predict a hidden-camera exposé of your factory practices, but you have to be able to predict what your biggest detractors might say about your organization. And on a personal level, you have to be prepared to defend your organization.

But defending your organization doesn’t mean sticking your fingers in your ears and ignoring criticism. If you want to be more than a mouthpiece — if you want to be a true counselor — you need to serve as an arbiter of sorts between your organization and its various publics. (In using the plural form of the word “public,” I’ve triggered vivid flashbacks to reading PR textbooks. Wild.) Your organization has a story to tell, but your detractors probably have some valid points. Making meaningful, deliberate changes to your operations in response could have the dual benefits of easing detractors’ minds while improving your organization’s public perception, safety record, ethical standing or even bottom line.

In this particular case, the owners of the hatchery might point out that extreme measures like closing up shop and going vegan — which MFA hints at near the end of its video — is neither the only solution nor the best solution. The owners of the hatchery might avoid, though, saying things like “Hey, it used to be worse!” That’s beside the point and won’t satisfy anyone. If they wanted to be bold and more direct, they could point out that these male chicks are going to die now or die later on their way to the grocery store’s refrigerator section. So is killing them now so bad?

For more discussion on this topic, please go read Bill Sledzik’s post on the matter — and his readers’ comments. Bill is a PR professor at Kent State in Ohio, and he brings a smart, sharp perspective to this issue (and so many others).

Photo courtesy of ceanandjen on Flickr

All too rare, an exceptionally well-written news release is something this writer truly appreciates. It’s not just enough for an inspired PR pro to have an idea that’ll take the piece he needs to write from “poo” to “powerful.” He needs to work that piece through his colleagues’ and supervisors’ revisions and contributions — not to mention their apprehensions and their own “wonderful” ideas. As if that weren’t enough, the legal department looms dangerously close to the end of most approval processes.

When Ford found its 2010 Fusion Hybrid on the receiving end of some rumors circulating via e-mail — specifically, that the car could be had for only $15,000 via a special program — creativity kicked in faster than full-on crisis communications. For the better, I believe.

Now surely, this news release isn’t the most free-spirited, humorous or irreverent we’ve seen, but it’s a great example of maintaining a very reasonable, very human tone in a less than ideal situation. This release certainly could have been a straight-laced, by-the-book chunk legalese. You know, play it safe and whatnot.

Instead, Ford took the opportunity to convey a hint of personality — and to drive home a few key messages, to boot. Well played.

Photo courtesy of Ford Motor Company via Flickr

Agency rankings are worthless.  Indulge me a moment on my soapbox.

I received an email yesterday morning from a well-meaning researcher at the Business Journal,  asking us to update our agency profile and revenue numbers for possible inclusion in the ranking of Twin Cities Top 25 Public Relations Agencies.

“How do you define public relations?” I asked.

“We don’t have any hard and fast definitions of PR for this list,” she wrote back. “It is basically self-defined and general consenus defined. Sorry we can’t be more clear.”

Therein lies the problem with these agency rankings. There is no general consensus. Fact is, the rise of the Internet has fundamentally changed the agency landscape, and the once thin line between what’s PR and advertising has been blurred.

That’s why we’re suddenly seeing traditional PR firms competing against traditional ad agencies, usually on non-traditional ground.  For that reason, it no longer makes sense to rank them separately. We, and others in the market, risk our integrated and non-traditional positioning by lumping our revenue into undefined, traditional boxes for the benefit of inclusion in these sorts of rankings.  We wish it weren’t so, because we’ve certainly seen value in being included in these rankings in the past.

Twin Cities Business Monthly and the Business Journal need to get with the times.  Their rankings are deeply flawed and outdated measures of what’s happening in the agency and marketing worlds.  My solution? Combine the advertising and PR agency rankings into one. Let the agencies include a brief descriptor of range of services (media relations, social media marketing, copywriting, brand strategy, etc.).

Such a list would take a lot of the guesswork out for integrated shops, like ours, that blend traditional and non-traditional marketing approaches. It would also give marketers a better snapshot of the Twin Cities agency landscape, allowing those drawing up shortlists from such a resource to get a more accurate sense of relative size and scope, for whatever that’s worth.  It’s not a perfect solution,  but certainly a big improvement, IMHO.

Weigh in, agency and marketing types. What do you think of agency rankings, and do you have other suggestions for how they can be improved?

No shame in going home with the consolation prize. The local Weber Shandwick office has never lacked great leadership and a deep roster of talent.  Same for PSB.  They are venerable firms, who have long set the standard for excellence in town.  Twin Cities firms made a stong showing at the Silver Anvils, with no fewer than six local agencies, including OLSON, Exponent and CLS, represented.  We were honored to be nominated alongside all of them on the biggest night in PR, and congratulate our Homies on their great work.