Shop Talk

Shop Talk’s third anniversary is here, which means a new beginning.

With that in mind, I have decided to close this blog down …

and relaunch it as Can We Talk? right over here:

It’s a fresh start – something I’ve desperately needed and I am greatly looking forward to it. Please join me and let’s talk about whatever tickles our fancy.

Thank you all so much and hope to see you there!

Jenn

P.S. This blog will remain “live” for a few more days as I get settled in to my new digs.

Sit tight- you’ll find out!

You probably know the Michael Phelps story now, so there’s no real need for me to rehash all the details. In case you’ve been living under a rock, however, here’s a quick rundown: Phelps had one goal in mind at the 2008 Beijing Olympics – to win eight gold medals. While medaling in all eight events may seem impossible improbable, Phelps made it look easy as he captured the coveted gold in each race. His quest, however, wasn’t without its snarls and near-misses.

While Phelps had a comfortable lead in most races, he almost came up short several times. Nevertheless, Lady Luck seemed to smile down on him and his teammates with big pearly whites. From Jason Lezak’s dazzling surge toward the end of the 4×100m free relay to Phelps’ photograph finish (literally) against Milorad Cavic in the 100-meter butterfly, the odds shifted significantly in his favor.

Phelps eight-for-eight rally has meant so many things to the professional sporting world. First, he managed to win without the use of performance-enhancing drugs, a problem that has dogged athletes (especially those in the Olympic Games) for quite some time. Second, he shattered swimming legend Mark Spitz’ previous world record of seven gold medals in one Olympic bout and now ranks second all-time (16 medals) behind Ukrainian gymnast Larissa Latynina (she has 18) in total career Olympic medals. What’s even more refreshing is that he has managed to accomplish his quest with nary an egotistical hair on his head, instead flashing a crooked smile and embodying an “Aw, shucks” attitude, while also heaping the praise on his teammates and opponents.

Now, it’s been a whirlwind tour for the swimming phenom who has been traveling the globe extensively since his last race. Call it Michael Phelps Mania, if you will. He’s slated to release a new book in time for the holidays, which should fare better than his prior release, “Michael Phelps: Beneath the Surface.” (Apparently, it did not sell many copies). He’s even been tapped to host the Sept. 13 season premiere of “Saturday Night Live.” If these ESPN SportsCenter commercials (one & two) are any indication, the kid just might have a shot at doing a decent job and/or being funny.

Whether it’s hawking Frosted Flakes, Visa credit cards, or some other product, Phelps has the potential to earn up to $50 million or more through endorsements, according to The Wall Street Journal. NBC, which has the rights to the Olympics, is also cashing in on the Phelps Phenomenon. According to CNN, NBC’s coverage of the swimming competitions saw an average of 30 million viewers a night, thanks in part to Phelps’ dominance in the pool. The network has become so enthralled by this, that it nabbed the rights to the 2009 World Swimming Championship. Let’s face it, televised swimming doesn’t particularly capture a huge market share. Yet, NBC is taking a gamble now and hoping that people will still be wrapped up in the post-Olympics Phelps buzz.

Beyond all the immediate attention, how does Phelps plan to stay relevant? Phelps is the “it” boy for now, but let’s remember that the Olympics come only once every four years and (again) televised swimming isn’t a normal “Sunday ritual” like football or any other sport. In addition, some people just don’t find him all that interesting. Phelps has pledged to swim in the 2012 London Olympics and will hang up his Speedo thereafter. What is his long-range vision until then? After? And no, the obvious answer shouldn’t be to just get some high-profile celebrity girlfriend to keep his name in the newspapers. (He’s already been linked with Carrie Underwood, fellow swimmer Amanda Beard, and Lindsay Lohan).

To keep himself newsworthy, Phelps should concentrate on more positive (and less shallow) pursuits. He is already actively involved with several charities and makes the rounds in the Baltimore-area school system. It’s time to step that up a notch by harnessing his new money and endorsements in the creation of his own charity. Whether it raises awareness of an issue dear to his heart or helps children like him find an outlet through swimming, he’s sure to score gold out of the water.

In addition, Phelps has the opportunity to use his prior DUI charge for good. As part of his 2004 probation, Phelps was required to give speeches to three schools about making choices. Now that he has even more Olympic gold around his neck, it’s high-time for him to urge youth that making the wrong choices could mean not realizing dreams, a reality Phelps himself almost faced.

“There’s nowhere to go, but up,” as the saying goes, but only time will tell just how bright Phelps truly wants his star to shine.

Photo credit: The Baltimore Sun

Update (8/27/08) – Woah, so apparently, the “Man Men” Twitter accounts are NOT the work of AMC’s PR team, but fans of the show. I should have known when I saw @bud_melman. A great idea by the fans, but the transparency was definitely lost in the mix. Not good.

Read the PRWeek article here: “AMC Responds to Twittering ‘Mad Men’ Characters”

Now the question is, will AMC ask to take over these accounts or let these “Mad Men” continue on as they were? I think there’s potential here for AMC to throw their support behind these fans and their alter egos. Yet, only time will tell.

Original post:

A big kudos to the person (or team?) behind the appearance of “Mad Men” characters on Twitter.

It’s really neat to see them interacting not only with each other “in character,” but also with the rest of the Twittersphere. Judging by the amount of chatter I see in my own Twitter time line, I’d say that my fellow Tweeps are enjoying the interaction as well.

What a cool, edgy spin on a show that’s “set” in the 1960s.

If you’re a fan of the show, I definitely recommend checking them out.

@Don_Draper

@Joan_Holloway

@Paul_Kinsey

@Pete_Campbell

@PeggyOlson

@Bobbie_Barrett

@Bertram_Cooper

@Sal_Romano

If you’ve yet to catch an episode, AMC has you covered: Mad Men

Photo Credit: AMC

Almost every single morning, I hop on a bus heading to downtown or some other point in close proximity to work. Sometimes, I find myself people watching as I grab a seat and wait out the eight-minute commute (sometimes much longer depending on the traffic o’ the day and how many people need to get on and off – if you live in a sizeable city, you can surely relate).

In my little bouts of watching, I tend to notice that many people have iPods or similar mp3 devices and it’s made me wonder … Do people use them as a means of amusement, to make the commute more pleasant? Or, is it a way to avoid people – to hide behind a pair of earbuds and ignore existance as we know it? Surely, no one would even dare to speak to you over the deafening thrashing of guitars from an industrial German-rock band. (And yes, I am guilty of this, just so we’re clear).

Even more to my wonderment is how much people have become more reliant on technology than each other. But in this day and age, is it really hard not to be? Oh, I am definitely a digital baby by all means. I made e-zines for a subscriber base of hundreds of teens when I was 14-18 (little known fact #275) and wrote in an online journal long before I considered PR. I can remember my first time on the internet, which was AOL back in the day. Now, I can’t even begin to fathom how I, or anyone else for that matter, would live without all of this.

We know that people make it work like the Amish, for example, whose communities don’t depend on technology, but upon individuals working together as a whole – building relationships, communicating and solving their problems face to face. Perhaps we can take a page and realize that even with all of this technology that can figure out everything for us, we still need each other.

During the last several months, the idea of community has become so much more significant to me as I’ve started to really connect with many different people across multiple online platforms. Each person brings something unique to the table and while I may not interact on a routine basis, I do love to read and wrap my head around what’s important to them.

From this, I realize that community is just as important offline as it is online and it’s always been my personal goal to continue to grow my relationships, most importantly offline within the Pittsburgh PR community. Building relationships can be hard, especially when you have tendencies to be an introvert, like me. Yet, I’ve discovered there are two important things to establishing good relationships:

1. Picking up the phone. Here and there, I see much older professionals convey a sense of bewilderment that some of the younger professionals won’t pick up a phone. E-mail works, sure. It’s fast and easy to succinctly convey your thoughts to someone else. Still, I think there’s a necessity to pick up the telephone and speak to an actual human voice on the other end. The bad thing about e-mail or instant messaging is that a word, phrase or tone can be interpreted in an entirely different way than intended. I think that there is less chance for something to be misconstrued in an actual telephone conversation, unless of course, one person is having a bad day. (And yes, I know we could launch into the Shannon-Weaver Model of Communication, etc., but we won’t). True, I can say much more in an e-mail when I’ve had time to think, but I still enjoy making conversation and forging that connection with others via a simple phone call. Most importantly, you demonstate that you care – that the person is more than just an email address or a handle and he/she is worthy of your time.

2. Take risks. Stepping out of your comfort zone is key to creating new relationships. Yep, I hear this all the time and I’m sure you do as well, but it is very true. Putting yourself in an entirely new situation can be scary, but empowering at the same time. Just remember to swallow and take a deep breath before you take the plunge. I’ve made it a point now to either pursue new contacts on my own by introducing myself on the street somewhere or at an event. It’s hard because I can be pretty shy at first meeting, but I know that to fully get over my fear, it’s what must be done. Isn’t this what it’s all about, however? We’re going to be pushed in PR to do things we may never have done before, whether it’s a one-on-one with a client’s representative or a big presentation to the CEO.  Why not take risks and try new things? We’re engaging with so many different people who all have different goals in mind. The best way, in my humble opinion, to fully understand their needs is to take the time to actively pursue them, start a conversation and maintain that dialogue with the best intentions and full transparency.

So, perhaps the next time we’re on that bus, train or plane, we should start that conversation with the person sitting next to us. We never know where it might lead.

Wow — What started as a simple musing on an everyday occurrence has turned into a long-winded ramble. Sorry, folks! LOL.

As I was getting my daily fix of lolcats, I stumbled upon this little gem. The Humane Society is sponsoring an LOLseals caption contest. Much like creating and submitting your own language-deficient cat (or other animal), the roflbot creator on the Society’s web site allows you to choose a photo and create your own humorous, cute or touching LOLseal. All entries are displayed on Flickr. Next week, staff will select their top ten entries and acclaimed photographer Nigel Barker, currently an “America’s Next Top Model” judge, will select the winner.

It just goes to show that even the craziest, sometimes most pointless internet memes can be used for something positive and have such a profound impact, calling attention to a very serious issue. In this case, it’s a cause very dear to my own heart.

So, LOL yourself on over and create your own!

Here’s mine!

Editor’s Note v1.0: It’s going to be a pretty busy week. We have a theater company in from London and the production kicks off tomorrow.

Because I’ll probably be too spent to string together coherent thoughts, I thought I’d share a bit of creative writing that I posted on my personal blog over the summer. Sometimes, I like to think I’m funny. Well, I at least made a few people laugh for sure.

Dear Starbucks,

I don’t know how to say this, but I have a confession to make … I cheated.

I didn’t know what I was thinking that Saturday morning when I walked past you, crossed the street and took a risk, opening myself up to a new experience, diving into world that was so new, so strange to me. His name was Caribou.

Long had I heard his whispers. His flashy neon beckoning me to him. The looks of those who came from him satisfied. Men and women alike. All in blissful gaits as they walked the streets. He had this uncanny ability to quench their aching desires. It was written across their faces. Temptation gnawed at me day after day. Yet, I resisted. For I knew how long we’ve carried on and I couldn’t fathom breaking our bond.

Finally, it became too much to bear. I had to know what he was like. I strolled in that morning, not knowing what to expect. Would I too join these men and women or be left with emptiness and disappointment? One of his associates asked me what I desired of him. Breathless, I responded. I knew what I wanted. I had craved it for so long. I was going mad without it. Venti nonfat raspberry mocha.

With a knowing smile, the associate whispered to another associate and he set to work. Before my eyes, his gift had appeared. Long had that been our special drink, but alas, you told me I had to satisfy myself in other ways until June 25.

Our time together was brief. I departed from him as quickly as I came and didn’t look back. I took one sip as I strode up the walkway and plunged into oblivion. The taste. My God. I knew that there was no turning back. A smooth swirl into ecstasy where flavors of chocolate and raspberry tangoed on my tongue before taking a dive down my throat, a velvety combination, so warm and soothing. I found myself in that blissful state like so many before me had been. He had given me what I craved.

I know not when we shall meet again, but I know that I will not be able to resist the next time I find myself near him.

It breaks my heart to tell you all of this now, but I couldn’t go on with this secret much longer. I hope that we can be friends even after all of this. I will still come to you in my time of need because you, yes only you can provide me with the sweet taste that I crave on a warm, sunny day. 

We’ll always have the venti sweetened Passion Iced Tea.

I promise.

Love always,

Jenn

Editor’s note v1.1: Starbucks is still my morning staple, but I’ve switched to nonfat vanilla lattes. Sometimes, I’ll go for a skinny vanilla latte – if I’m feeling adventurous. So, in essence, my affair with Caribou Coffee has been short-lived. I feel so cheap.

One thing I (and many others) remember fondly from childhood is candy. There’s something endearing about sugary sweets. Maybe it’s the associated memories of getting money from the “tooth fairy” and knowing what you wanted to spend it on right away. Alternatively, there were those hot summer days when M&Ms didn’t really melt in your mouth before first melting in your hand. Better yet, how about the stories your parents told you about candy when it used to cost five cents? (OK, I guess that only really applies if you’re young like me).  

There’s a sense of innocence and youth involved, so why is candy getting such a bad rap these days? OK, aside from you know, being bad for your teeth and detrimental to your healthy and weight. It’s not so much the fact that candy is sugar, (we know that) – it’s the fact that candy is taking on visible characteristics of drugs. 

According to various news reports, the Hershey Company has been forced to shelve a mint that looks alarmingly similar to a street drug packaged in the same manner. The confectionary conglomerate said the design was never meant to resemble anything, but it still has law enforcement officials up in arms because children in possession of the mint could be mistaken to have drugs, or think that a bag of drugs found on the street is actually candy.  

Rather than issue a total recall for the remaining product, Hershey has announced that it will not manufacture anymore after the current circulation runs out. This understandbly does not totally satisfy opponents of the candy whose own children died from drug overdoses. 

So, should Hershey have issued a recall? Probably. However, what this really boils down to is that Hershey is a business and like any business, the point is to make money. I imagine the company could fare well with a recall as other companies have in the past (i.e. McNeil with the tampered Tylenol scare), but for whatever reason, this was the better solution to them. I would hope that Research and Development is a little more cautious the next go-round. Although this product had fared well with test markets, sometimes people don’t think twice about any sort of ramifications, especially if this product was offered for sampling at no cost. 

I’m going to play devil’s advocate for a minute as well. Many candies look like drugs. If it’s really the intention to remove these from children, then the fight has to go well beyond Hershey. It isn’t the first company to be guilty of this, nor the last. We can argue that quite a few popular candies could be mistaken for drugs. I remember from my youth the candy cigarettes and bubblegum cigars. However, fact of the matter is that maybe going up against Hershey is only the beginning.

I’ve become more in-tune with my Twitter account recently after letting it sit idle for months. It’s very intriguing to read what people could say in 140 characters and who actually is using the platform.  

While on Twitter, I’ve searched nonprofits, PR agencies, sporting organizations and other things and people of personal and professional interest. Naturally, I started to think about politics as the upcoming election is saturating the media.

I’m not interested in discussing the candidate I support, but what does interest me is how each candidate is using the internet to engage potential and current supporters.  In the last election, social networking sites were still in their infancy with nothing more than a few blogs and social networking pages scattered here and there, yet in the last several years we have seen a real explosion in usage. Now, you can’t find a medium that at least one political candidate hasn’t touched.  

I’ll liken it to the grade school lunch table, everyone’s comparing lunches (lunch in the web case meaning ‘ideas’), trading lunches and making arguments as to who has the coolest “mom.” And the presidential candidates, well, they want to be known as top kid – the kid who has the best lunch AND the coolest mom.  It’s evident that the conversation is going on with or without them and if they want to steer that conversation in a positive spin, they have to be among  the loudest of voices whether it’s at that lunch table or on the internet.  

Interested in the how and why of such ventures, I decided to create my own little experiment. It was my intention to contact several campaigns and ask why they were so interested in social media and essentially what benefits they saw in participation.  

Well, it’s been about three weeks and I haven’t received a call yet from Ron, John (you know, the one with the Ken doll-esque coif) or Barack yet, but I’ll wait here until Election Day if I must. I have time, really.  

In all seriousness, I honestly didn’t expect a response considering I’m just little me here and the questions of a 24-year-old young professional, who is in the target young voter range, really aren’t that important. I suppose there’s just far more important people to woo, money to be had. I did receive, however, a form from the Obama camp to request a media interview in response to my initial message, which I found a bit funny. I mean I guess I could say I’m my own media entity, but I’m not rolling in that much green quite yet. (Imagine if I filled out that form signing off as my own media outlet – HA)! 

Regardless, if some campaign staffer from any presidential campaign ever stumbles upon this post, let’s have that conversation.

Moreover, if anyone wants to take a crack at whether you think social media is working in favor of the presidential candidates, have at it.

I’m a sports fan, though I do have my stipulations as to what I’ll watch. Hockey, football, soccer, tennis – you have me. Basketball and NASCAR, not so much. (I’m still trying to figure out what’s so thrilling about watching people drive cars around a track 200+ times). Baseball, however, is one of those sports that I can’t really get into if it’s on TV – it has to be an actual experience. I rarely go to games, which may explain why my interest in it is minimal at best.

Yet, what has piqued my interest is the ongoing steroid controversy (and the recently released Mitchell Report). An ongoing question of, “Did he or didn’t he?” when it comes to a certain player who broke one of baseball’s most historic records. Now with the rumors swirling around another storied player, you could say things are heating up.

 And I think of not only baseball, but the other sports where doping has had such a profound impact on the way we perceive these athletes to be demigods. I think of people like Marion Jones, Floyd Landis and several Olympic medalists – all of whom have been stripped of their respective titles and medals in recent years.

Is this as much a crisis for the sporting bodies as it might be for the accused? For the sponsors? I think it could fall on either side of the fence. On the one hand, you have the people who don’t care as long the team/individual wins and brings home the bacon; while on the other, it’s a question of ethics and morals. What is this teaching young children about healthy competition? What is this going to mean for me as a sponsor if I don’t distance myself now? How much money can we stand to lose if it’s true?

I thought about this over the summer and I actually had a post all scribbled down on a sheet of paper. Oh, the ideological remedies I sought to vindicate professional sports:

If some of the most hailed athletes could sign a pledge or a commitment to playing the game without the use of performance enhancing drugs and take a stand that they believe doping is wrong, it could divert attention away from the negative and accentuate the positive.

Whether intentional or not, the act of doping is coming at a heavy price. Fines, suspensions and bans are marring the way the game is played, undermining sportsmanship, and discrediting those who choose to subject their bodies to chemical and hormonal alterations.

We’re not just looking at the professional level here, folks. High school and college students are looking at getting juiced as an option, too. These people may or may not be able to repair their own images, but there still is a chance for them to make a positive impact and educate youth to not make the same choices that they have, whether it is by making PSAs or going on the circuit and promoting drug-free choices.

Would they truly be remorseful? Who knows. Perhaps if they weren’t so focused on their own gain so much as helping the team, they may not have done so in the first place.

There’s more to that, but it’s irrelevant at this point. Upon re-examining that original post, sure, I’d like to say let’s all say “we’re sorry” while holding hands and singing “Kumbaya,” but the problem is more complex. There’s too much money tied up in professional sports. With all involved in this matter, whether you’re a sponsor, owner, player, spectator – what’s more important, doing right or winning?

I hardly want to be cynical as I think things can and should change, but my original thought that the court of public opinion (which was not included above) would reign may not be so realistic. I’ve looked at the forums where people laugh at the Mitchell Report and while those sentiments are not representative of everyone, you have to figure that for every voice in contempt, there has to be at least ten more.

I think of a post I read from Bruce Pilgrim for Strumpette. Pilgrim’s own scrutiny of the situation perhaps best expresses the sentiment of a lot of people:

And in the end (get it?), do baseball fans give a rat’s ass (get it?) if players are juiced on bennies, roided up, and freakishly large? Maybe a few. The rest of us only want to know what’s his batting average? Any movement on his fastball? Can he go to his left? Can he smack a hanging curve into the next zip code?

It’s a stinging reminder that when it comes to sports, it’s (most often) better to win at all costs.