Shop Talk

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.

And with this, I cringe …

PR Newswire’ Employee Slugs Release ‘Loony-Bin Rally,’ Gets Fired

Not necessarily just because of what the employee did, but also because whenever Gawker mentions our industry, it’s rarely for anything positive.