While I was on the road in Texas last week I had the opportunity one night to go into my folders to review PR and marketing links and articles that I stockpile but usually put off reading. In some of my golden oldies from this past June was a video I viewed on “Tips on creating Good Web Videos.” The video was a part the Tactics Video series presented by the PRSA (Public Relations Society of America.

It is a good piece worth viewing for a few reasons. In around 5 minutes the video hosted by Steve Lubetkin gives 5 great easy to understand tips for creating better in-house video. It also shows that if you are not doing a lot of video work as a PIO, technology makes it virtually idiot proof and in most instances you will come out looking like a pro.

Share on Facebook

I end the week with a pretty cool video that hopefully will inspire you as a PIO to try just a little bit harder and go just a little bit further.

We all learned during our Firefighter I that when water converts from liquid to vapor at 212°F, it expands 1,700 times its volume. Water can only be as hot as 212ºF, but steam reaches thousands of degrees in temperature, which can not only be potentially fatal to us but also very uncomfortable and often the cause of serious injury. That one degree difference should always be on our mind when it comes to ventilation tactics and nozzle choice.

That one extra degree to steam can make a world of difference in how we react on the fireground and the potential outcome.

We can also turn that one degree from a firefighter negative to a daily world positive.

Share on Facebook

There is an old adage in baseball that an umpire explaining his job once said “I calls em as I sees em.”  Well it appears to me that if Justin Pizzi, a reporter at WCAU, the NBC affiliate in Philadelphia, was calling balls and strikes his career as an umpire would be over before it began.

To refresh your memory, a seventeen year old boy made a fool of himself by darting across the field at the Phillies/Cardinals game a few nights back. What made the story newsworthy was the fact that a Philadelphia police officer tasered him to end the kid’s mindless escapade.

This could have been a public relations and crisis communication nightmare. A police officer tasers a seventeen year old in front of 45,000 fans and witnesses. Talk about witnesses on the scene. This incident was without a doubt the most publically viewed use of this police weapon in history. It could have been a debacle for the Phillies and the city of Philadelphia.

The Phillies quickly responded to the incident to cover their bases so to speak and did a nice job of crafting a statement addressing the issue –

“This is the first time that a taser gun has been used by Philadelphia police to apprehend a field jumper.
The Police Department is investigating this matter and The Phillies are discussing with them whether in future situations this is an appropriate use of force under these circumstances. That decision will be made public.
The person was a 17-year-old male who will be charged with criminal trespass and related offenses. Because he is a juvenile we cannot release his name.”

Public opinion has been on the side of the police and the Phillies. A poll by the Philadelphia Inquirer shows that close to 70% of readers feel that PD had justification to fire the stunner.

Now back to cub reporter Pizzi.

First off, I couldn’t tell whether he was reporting hard news or trying to make this a human interest story. He was half smirking throughout the report like he didn’t exactly know which path to take.  The most disturbing part of his piece though was his reference to the “swarm” of police officers who were chasing the miscreant down.  To my knowledge, and that of the sold out house at Citizens Bank Park, one officer was chasing the suspect and tasered him. The remainder of the “swarm” of six appeared to be Phillies security or ushers. It probably would have been more appropriate to report that ‘the suspect was followed across the field by a Philadelphia police officer and five Phillies employees.”

This was irresponsible reporting in my mind. I am sure Pizzi had the opportunity to review the YouTube video several times before his on air report.

This disturbs me as a PIO. Pizzi’s use of words intimated something totally different then what actually was being played out and really transpired. He took liberties of not telling the facts properly. He reported the story with very few facts or insight.

This guy reports for NBC, in a major market?

Not the kind of reporter I would be happy seeing jump out of a truck with a camera crew on the fireground.

Share on Facebook

At a recent fire exhibition on Long Island a fellow PIO asked if I had a couple of minutes to talk to him about a problem he was having.  A number of people in his community were complaining to members of his volunteer department about what they thought was the excessive costs involved in running and maintaining a motorized drill team to compete. So upset was the Chief of Department that he asked the PIO to send a release to the local papers extolling the virtues of motorized racing.  The only problem is the PIO agrees with the community complaints.

As a member of his volunteer fire department my PIO friend is also a fire district taxpayer who was never happy with the costs associated with running a drill team.  (For the uninitiated I have an overview of motorized racing at the end of this post.)

I was at a loss for words. I told him to let me think about it a give him a call. It’s time for that call and I need your help!

I have over the years enjoyed attending motorized drills. But with today’s economy, motorized racing is a PR time bomb waiting to explode. My department does not have a motorized team and it helps me sleep better as a PIO, especially after my friend decided to write down the pros and cons of his department’s motorized team to try to formulate some sort of positive public release.

His list –

Pros

-          It helps keep drill team members physically fit, mentally sharp and better overall firefighters who get to practice stills.

-          It gives the public the opportunity to see firefighters from their department show in public the proficiency of their skills.

Cons

-          There are only 14 motorized drill team members in a department of 146 fire and EMS.

-          The racing equipment used by these guys is valued at close to $200,000.

-          Race fuel cost the department around $10.00 a gallon.

-          The team bought a new transporter a few years back that cost $75,000.

-          Two years ago the team “refreshed” one of their motorized engines and bought Hoosier race tires at a cost of close to$30,000.

-          The partying gets a little out of hand after some of the drills.

I am only the messenger here and report what he told me, but this is a dilemma I am having trouble giving him advice for.

His conscious tells him one thing, while his Chief tells him another.

HOW WOULD YOU ADVISE MY PIO BROTHER???

A quick look at motorized drill team racing -

For the uninitiatedtthere are two different categories of Drill-Team racing: “Old-Fashioned” racing teams, where all of the competitors race on foot, and any hoses or ladders that are used are carried on a small hand-pulled two-wheeled cart, and “Motorized” racing teams, which use two different classes of “truck” to race with: the Class-B racer, which is typically a heavily-modified older-model pickup truck retro-fitted with a pump, and the Class-C racer, which really bears no resemblance to anything except a modified dragster. Both the Class-B and Class-C racers have a “pickup”-type bed in the back on which to store folded-up lengths of special lightweight “racing hose”, a custom-made rack upon which special racing ladders can be rested for certain events. There are also usually flat “back-steps” on the rear of each rig for racers to stand on, as well as D-ring type handles attached to the rear of the racers so that the riders can hold on as they race down the track. Both classes will use racing engines, as well as racing slicks for tires, especially in the Class-C racer division.

Share on Facebook

When I speak to the media at an incident scene I have learned to push home my key points by being overly repetitive to a reporter’s questions. I learned this technique several years ago at Connections Day, a conference run every year by the Fair Media Council on Long Island, from a utility company public affairs executive I was having lunch with.

He told me that a spokesperson can reasonably expect an on scene broadcast media interview to last around seven minutes.  An interview with a newspaper reporter back at the office lasts a little longer, about thirteen minutes, since that medium allows for deeper analysis and probing. 

The seven-minute broadcast interview is typically truncated to a seven-second sound bite of the spokesperson’s main position within the report.  The thirteen-minute print interview?  A spokesperson is lucky if one attributed quote is more than thirteen words.  The rest of the media story is typically filled with “texture” to round out the subject:  an opposing point of view, “person-at-the-scene” reactions, related data and facts, etc. 

So in summary, his theory was:  five minutes down to seven seconds; ten minutes down to thirteen words.  If you accept the averages, than you must also accept the value of repeating your key points during those interviews. 

Repetition provides the best chance of inserting your key point-of-view, or report of the facts into these media stories.  Languishing on less-essential information reduces the chance of your key information being reported.

Here is a great YouTube video about a BBC satirists take on how a TV news report is framed out. A quick caution though. Even though it was broadcast on the BBC, it still contains a pretty potent cuss word.

Share on Facebook

As a PIO I always look for opportunity to educate the public as the result of a specific incident that my department responds to. When we have the first chimney fire of the year in the fall I usually float out to the media a story on chimney safety. Similar lessons to be learned are sent to the media after CO incidents, MVA’s, electrical fires etc. It’s a great way to let the public know about an incident and ultimately how it can be avoided.

My fire brother, the world renowned Firegeezer, scooped me on covering a Massachusetts Fire Chiefs partnership with Boston’s WFXT-TV to tell the public about the dangers of some modular homes.

 TAKE A LOOK AT THE GEEZERS STORY

Share on Facebook

Awhile back I came across a dozen tips for Google searches. The information has made my life easier as a PIO. Features I never knew existed such as Exclude Words, Specific Document Types and This OR That has helped me save valuable time when I need to refer to Google for a search.

12 Google Search Tips

1. Explicit Phrase:
   Let’s say you are looking for content about internet marketing.  Instead of just typing internet marketing into the Google search box, you will likely be better off searching explicitly for the phrase.  To do this, simply enclose the search phrase within double quotes.

Example: “internet marketing”

1. Exclude Words:
   Let’s say you want to search for content about internet marketing, but you want to exclude any results that contain the term advertising.  To do this, simply use the “-” sign in front of the word you want to exclude.

Example Search: internet marketing -advertising

1. Site Specific Search:
   Often, you want to search a specific website for content that matches a certain phrase.  Even if the site doesn’t support a built-in search feature, you can use Google to search the site for your term. Simply use the “site:somesite.com” modifier.

Example: “internet marketing” site:www.smallbusinesshub.com

1. Similar Words and Synonyms:
   Let’s say you are want to include a word in your search, but want to include results that contain similar words or synonyms.  To do this, use the “~” in front of the word.

Example: “internet marketing” ~professional

1. Specific Document Types:
   If you’re looking to find results that are of a specific type, you can use the modifier “filetype:”.  For example, you might want to find only PowerPoint presentations related to internet marketing.

Example: “internet marketing” filetype:ppt

1. This OR That:
   By default, when you do a search, Google will include all the terms specified in the search.  If you are looking for any one of one or more terms to match, then you can use the OR operator.  (Note:  The OR has to be capitalized).

Example: internet marketing OR advertising

1. Phone Listing:
   Let’s say someone calls you on your mobile number and you don’t know who it is.  If all you have is a phone number, you can look it up on Google using the phonebook feature.

Example: phonebook:617-555-1212 (note:  the provided number does not work – you’ll have to use a real number to get any results).

1. Area Code Lookup:
   If all you need to do is to look-up the area code for a phone number, just enter the 3-digit area code and Google will tell you where it’s from.

Example: 617

1. Numeric Ranges:
   This is a rarely used, but highly useful tip.  Let’s say you want to find results that contain any of a range of numbers.  You can do this by using the X..Y modifier (in case this is hard to read, what’s between the X and Y are two periods.  This type of search is useful for years (as shown below), prices or anywhere where you want to provide a series of numbers.

Example: president 1940..1950

1. Stock (Ticker Symbol):
   Just enter a valid ticker symbol as your search term and Google will give you the current financials and a quick thumb-nail chart for the stock.

Example: GOOG

1. Calculator:
   The next time you need to do a quick calculation, instead of bringing up the Calculator applet, you can just type your expression in to Google.

Example: 48512 * 1.02

1. Word Definitions:
   If you need to quickly look up the definition of a word or phrase, simply use the “define:” command.

Example: define:plethora

Web Search Strategies in Plain English from leelefever on Vimeo.

Share on Facebook

I have taken a few days to review all the public information related quotes pertaining to the plane crash and fire in Austin, Texas.

From an Austin Fire Department perspective they did all the right things. On the fire ground their response, attack and search all followed SOP. During the initial news conference Austin Fire Chief Rhonda Mae Kerr spoke briefly, discussed the fire, thanked the Department and applauded the response of the entire unified command in the city. She turned the investigation over to the FBI.

Her brief remarks can be heard at 3:10 of the outdoor press conference.

Ditto, kudos goes out to the Austin Police for their response and subsequent comments on the incident.

From a crisis communications standpoint the real key players in the incident were the IRS and FBI. Police and Fire did their jobs efficiently but due to the bizarre nature of the incident it was the FBI and IRS that needed to quickly address the public.

After Joseph Stack flew his small plane into the Austin IRS building, news outlets immediately reported that nearly 200 IRS employees worked at that particular building. Any act involving an airplane, a building and a crash profoundly echoes the Sept. 11 attacks, adding a dimension of fear and angst to the situation. 

Add to the horrific attack the added fact that Stack left behind a detailed suicide blog documenting his gripes with the IRS and you have both an on scene as well as web based crisis to deal with simultaneously.

I’ll admit because of its preconceived reputation as a slow and lumbering federal government mega agency, their ability to quickly address a crisis would fall way below my expectations.

I give the public information arm of the IRS good grades though  for its cool and controlled statement, released a few hours after the incident:

“We can confirm a small plane hit a building in Austin, Texas, that includes IRS offices in Echelon Building I that houses about 190 IRS employees. We are still in process accounting for all employees and will update as information is available.”

Later, a statement from IRS commissioner Doug Shulman was posted on the federal website irs.gov:

Like most Americans, I am shocked by the tragic events that took place in Austin this morning. This incident is of deep concern to me. We are working with law-enforcement agencies to fully investigate the events that led up to this plane crash.

My thoughts and prayers go out to the dedicated employees of the IRS who work in the Austin building. We will immediately begin doing whatever we can to help them during this difficult time.

While this appears to be an isolated incident, the safety of our employees is my highest priority. We will continue to do whatever is needed to ensure our employees are safe.

The response calmly addressed the story before it could snowball.  The statement by Shulman focused on the efforts to account for all personnel, and it allayed suspicions that the act might be the work of a terrorist group.

It confirmed the facts without mentioning the perpetrator, promising additional information as was warranted. 

The IRS response can be seen as concerned about its employees and having offered a measured acknowledgement about an isolated incident.  Online and traditional media channels were left to fill in the blanks about the pilot and his motives.

Other governmental agencies helped the IRS maintain this control: The FBI reiterated that there was no indication of terrorism, and it had the suicide blog post taken offline for a period, while the Department of Homeland Security declared the matter a criminal investigation. 

That initial response set the tone for the news cycle to follow. Without an immediate response, the blogosphere and social media sites such as Twitter could have run in any direction with the story.

The perpetrator might have been painted sympathetically or depicted as a martyr by tax-haters. Rumors about the involvement of anti-American interests might have indeed engendered terror, with escalating panic and silliness. And the IRS could have been portrayed as a soulless institution with concern only for the tax record and not for the human cost of the tragedy.  

None of these, however, has happened. The public information provided by the IRS, FBI, Austin Fire and Police was brief, accurate, void of speculation and only fact and addressed issues in real time.

The events were covered by both the traditional and new media with fact and respect for the tragedy with the tone set by governmental agencies.

Share on Facebook

The most practical government applications for Twitter are in public safety and emergency notifications. I’m currently kicking around a blueprint for exactly how I can use Twitter more effectively to keep the community instantaneously informed of fires, road closings from MVA’s, power outages etc.

Currently I use Twitter as a tool to spread information on stories I post on my departments website. These Tweets about incident reports usually draw a good number of followers who go to the story via a link on the Twitter post. I truly know though that the value of Twitter is being able to give real time information during an emergency.

The Los Angeles Fire Department has been at the forefront of Twitter usage. They Tweet with bulletins about structural fires, the number of responding firefighters, and injuries and casualties. A typical post is something like: “12126 Burbank Bl* No ‘formal’ evacuations; Firefighters maintaining 500′ exclusion zone pending LAFD Hazmat arrival.”

When a commuter train derailed Sept. 12, 2008, in Chatsworth, Calif., killing dozens and injuring hundreds, the LAFD tweeted several times to update the public about rescue operations. And citizens near a wildfire in Griffith Park in 2007 tweeted to the LAFD about wind direction and smoldering hot spots, which helped firefighters, control the 800-acre blaze.

I know the value of Twitter, and once my blueprint is complete I will embark on the marketing phase to get the community involved as followers.

I would appreciate hearing from my fellow PIO’s about any department that has a Twitter emergency response plan in place.

Here is a quick video about the emergency use of Twitter by Public Service of New Hampshire when thousands of homes lost power during a major ice storm.

Share on Facebook

Many of us have been following the tragic townhouse fire in Flint, Michigan this past Saturday that took the lives of four children ranging in age from 1 to 4. A full investigation is underway to determine two key issues. The first is how the blaze started.

Currently the theory is that one of the children’s fathers allegedly fell asleep while babysitting with food on the stove. Some neighbors claim he was not in the building at all when the fire raged.

The second issue, more germane to The Fire PIO,  is how the Flint Fire Department will answer allegations that their response time was inadequate, and what the closing of a local firehouse might have played in the tragedy.

Obviously the tragic toll this has taken on the families of the deceased and how these events must be weighing on the Flint Fire Department, make this an inopportune time to put the fire and response under a critical microscope.

I will keep you posted, from a PIO’s standpoint, on how the department responds to the response time and firehouse closing issues over the next several weeks.

Here is a general television news overview of the fire and its aftermath from ABC’s WJRT-TV.

A look at some print coverage.

The Associated Press

Connect Mid Michigan

 Two stories questioning firefighter response.

Overview from MLIVE.com

Timeline of the run from MLIVE.com

Share on Facebook