Focus group tests language to sell war against Iran
According to Mother Jones, Martin Focus Groups of Alexandria, Va., paid participants $150 to answer questions about what language would best sell military action against Iran to the American public.
How would you feel if Hillary [Clinton] bombed Iran? How would you feel if George Bush bombed Iran? And how would you feel if Israel bombed Iran?
Mother Jones first reported that the focus group was sponsored by Freedom’s Watch (whose literature accompanied the focus group), but it turns out it was commissioned by the Israel Project and designed by Public Opinion Strategies.
What does this mean? Probably a lot more stories in mainstream media via press releases and other means.
Stay tuned.
Posted by Becky @
2:04 pm |
E&P photos of the year cover
The November 2007 issue of Editor & Publisher showcases its “Eighth Annual Photos of the Year.” The magazine (not the cover posted online)Â has a yellow sticker:
Also on the cover is a photograph of the grand-prize winner, camera in hand. Clearly a Canon. Yeah, yeah. He won a Canon camera as the grand-prize winner. But, well, yuck.
“Turn the camera a little to the right. We can’t see the logo.”
Yeah, yeah. It’s a magazine cover, not a news photo. But still. Yuck.
In other E&P news, “What Do Women Want?” [Scratching head.]
Newspapers are losing working mothers and time-pressed single women even faster than they are losing readers overall. Adult newspaper readership has dwindled from more than 80% of the total audience in 1964 to 49.9% last year, according to Scarborough Research and the Newspaper Association of America (NAA). But in 1964, only about 2% fewer women read newspapers than men. That gap stood at nearly 5% in 2006, with readership among men being 52.3% and women 47.6%. This gender gap is not just a U.S. problem, but shows up in nearly every nation, the World Association of Newspapers reported last year.
While I would dearly love to pick apart the numbers (a 3 percent gender-gap increase in 42 years … stop the presses!), I just don’t have time. I skimmed the article because, well, apparently I’m a “habitual skimmer.”
Some of the most powerful themes for women are the health and wellness of their children. Women are “habitual skimmers,” so stories should be short to attract female readers, says Skoloda. Research shows they like brief and bulleted formats, but they also want personal stories. “USA Today certainly has a format that has been very appealing to women,” she adds. Another favorite: The Wall Street Journal’s “Weekend Journal.”
So keep the stories short, bub. Hey, here’s an idea. Why not make everything pink? I hear girls love pink.
Posted by Becky @
12:26 am |
What Working Mother magazine won’t tell you: Global gender gap
If things are going so well for American working mothers, why did the United States fall from 23rd place to 31st place on the Global Gender Report?
Posted by Becky @
10:26 am |
What Working Mother magazine won’t tell you: Work/life balance not so important to companies
In an August 2007 survey, 89 percent of employees polled said work/life balance programs are important. Employers? Not so much. About half of the human-resources professionals polled considered them important, according to the 2007 Monster Work/Life Balance Survey.
The online survey included 506 HR professionals and 830 employees. While the survey is not scientific, the results illustrate a wide gap between what employees and employers consider important, despite all the public relations surrounding work/life balance. Maybe it’s a bit like the gap between what Corporate Voices for Working Families says it considers important in theory and what the U.S. Chamber of Commerce shows what it considers important in practice.
Posted by Becky @
4:07 pm |
Are you free for lunch Nov. 15?
Here’s what you do.
- 1) Register for the teleconference. (It’s free.)
- 2) Leave a comment or e-mail me so I can add you to the list.
- 3) Call on Nov. 15.
- 4) Blog your reaction, and send me the link. (If you don’t have a blog, you can guest post here.)
- 5) Win the book! (I’ll draw a name at random.)
Join us, won’t you?
…
Corporate Voices for Working Families says it focuses on “Five Pillars of Work,” 1) Afterschool Care and Early Childhood Education, 2) Youth Transitions, 3) Mature Workforce, 4) Flexibility and 5) Lower Wage Work.
…
Members of Corporate Voices are companies affiliated with the U.S. Chamber of Commerce through their local chambers. The Chamber, which ranks first in lobbying spending ($72.7 million in 2006), holds this position on labor and workforce:
Oppose expanding workplace laws and craft alternatives when necessary. Aggressively oppose union-backed proposals to increase the minimum wage and abolish secret ballot elections in favor of card check majorities for union recognition. Oppose any efforts to expand Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) leave or mandate paid sick leave. Block attempts to increase penalties for criminal violations of OSHA. Continue to expose unreasonable union organization tactics such as salting and corporate campaigns. Protect the use of binding arbitration in employment. Aggressively advocate for pro-employer provisions in priority international labor and employment policy proposals. Continue to push for a reasonable application of the revised Americans with Disabilities Act accessibility guidelines.
The U.S. Chamber believes NCLB is one of the critical tools needed to transform U.S. education so that all students graduate academically prepared for college, citizenship, and the 21st century workplace.
- The Chamber supported the presidential veto of SCHIP (State Children’s Health Insurance Program).
- The Chamber opposes a bill that would give employees seven paid sick days each year. More here.
…
What will they say about you? Tune in and find out.
Posted by Becky @
7:16 pm |
Viva Viagra? Oh, no, they didn’t!
Oh, yes. They did. Think that’s cheesy? Check out Pfizer’s official Viagra Web site. Yeesh.
I realize this commercial started airing earlier this summer, but I just heard it for the first time last week. Lisa Marie Presley has called it “revolting,” but she doesn’t own the rights to the song so she has no control over it.
Who knows. If Elvis were still around, maybe he’d be tempted to sing it himself.
Posted by Becky @
10:33 pm |
State Department grants*** Blackwater immunity
But it apparently didn’t tell FBI agents before sending them to Baghdad to investigate the Sept. 16, 2007, incident that left 17 Iraqis dead.
The investigative misstep comes in the wake of already-strained relations between the United States and Iraq, which is demanding the right to launch its own prosecution of the Blackwater bodyguards.
Misstep? The U.S. State Department can’t seem to get a grasp on oversight. The U.S. embassy offers to pay Iraqi families $12,500 for each Blackwater victim. Who’s running this joint? FEMA?
Blackwater spokeswoman Anne Tyrrell declined comment about the U.S. investigation.
Well. Duh.
It’s not clear why the Diplomatic Security investigators agreed to give immunity to the bodyguards, or who authorized doing so.
Of course not.
Bureau of Diplomatic Security chief Richard Griffin last week announced his resignation, effective Thursday. Senior State Department officials, speaking on condition of anonymity, have said his departure was directly related to his oversight of Blackwater contractors.
But Blackwater branches out and expands its contracts, even though it was accused of stealing Iraqi airplanes, smuggling and illegally selling weapons, almost killing a U.S. soldier and evading taxes.
Last week, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice ordered a series of measures to boost government oversight of the private guards who protect American diplomats in Iraq. They include increased monitoring and explicit rules on when and how they can use deadly force.
Right. Cultural awareness training. Yeah. That’ll fix it. Heckuva job, Condi.
At least the immunity explains why Blackwater CEO Erik Prince “welcomes extra oversight,” has employed a new PR campaign and blitzed (blizted with Blizter … get it?) the media, chatting with everyone but Letterman, and asked reporters to contact Congress on Blackwater’s behalf. Sort of his own little “bring ’em on” statement.
***Oh, wait. Blackwater always had immunity.
Dig this.
Oh, that Bush. He’s such a kidder.
Need more laughs?
We believe that Iraq as a market will continue to grow for some time due to the outsourcing by the US government in terms of convoy logistics, in terms of guarding, that will continue. The fact that there are obviously huge oil reserves in Iraq and international companies will go back in once the security situation stabilises a bit more. — Patrick Toyne-Sewell, ArmorGroup International, The Independent, Oct. 24, 2007
Here are some of the companies with government contracts in Iraq:
Posted by Becky @
3:11 pm |
FEMA: Heckuva Job Brownie 2.0
The Federal Emergency Management Agency talked about the California fires to fake reporters at a fake press conference in Washington, D.C., on Tuesday, and it was presented as real in mainstream media. Harvey E. Johnson Jr., deputy administrator and chief operating officer of FEMA answered questions from his public-relations staff, Cindy Taylor (communications deputy director), Michael Widomski (program operations), John P. Philbin (director, Office of External Affairs) and possibly Ali Kirin (press aide). Think Progress has the video from FOX News.
Anyone get fired? Suspended? Fined? Put in a corner?
Actually, Philbin was moving up and out — as the new head of public affairs at the Office of the Director of National Intelligence. Sweet.
The Department of Homeland Security was shocked — shocked! — at FEMA’s behavior.
“This is inexcusable and offensive, and stunts like this will not be tolerated or repeated,” said spokeswoman [i.e., PR] Laura Keehner. “It was a lapse of judgment, and we find it offensive, and it won’t happen again.”
The White House yawned.
“It is not a practice that we would employ here at the White House,” said Press Secretary Dana Perino, mentioning three times that it was an “error in judgment.” “It’s not something I would have condoned, and they, I’m sure, will not do it again.”
All-righty then.Â
Oh, and speaking of Brownie, guess what he’s up to now. He’s giving interviews and advice about disaster preparedness for Cotton Companies.
I know. Crazy, isn’t it? I would have thought he’d go back to horses. Or branched out into fashion. But, gee, maybe he really knows what he’s talking about. The Oklahoman thinks so. CNN (and Wolf!) thinks so. Wow. Thumbs up, Brownie.
Hat tip: Matthew
Posted by Becky @
10:32 pm |
What Working Mother magazine and WSJ’s Work & Family columnist won’t tell you
I mentioned that TIME published an article questioning the Working Mother magazine “100 best” list, but I didn’t get around to adding that WSJ.com questioned the list too. Sara Schaefer Muñoz of The Juggle posted “Do Family-Friendly Companies Live Up to Their Claim?” on Sept. 25, 2007.
Nine days later, The Wall Street Journal‘s Work & Family columnist Sue Shellenbarger wrote “What Makes a Company A Great Place to Work Today” (on the same page as the “soft” benefits article) on Oct. 4, 2007.
Shellenbarger (who was named one of America’s “25 Most Influential Working Mothers” by Working Mother magazine in 1997, according to a lecture bio) started with, “Tis the season for workplace rankings, with ‘best-workplace’ lists sprouting everywhere this fall,” and she mentioned Working Mother magazine’s list, as well as Business Week‘s “Best Places to Launch a Career” list. Then she broke it into “what’s hot” and “what’s not” categories.
Hot
Flexibility. She mentioned AstraZeneca, where “more than two-thirds of the 30 employees in a medical-resources group are regular users of alternative setups tailored to their needs.” (That’s 20 employees.) Which is odd because Working Mother said 90 percent of employees at the main office — almost 2,700 employees — worked some sort of flexible schedule. In any case, neither Working Mother nor Shellenbarger offered more details.
She wrote that in Abbott‘s office in Ohio, “75 percent of 108 employees are on flexible work setups and the rest have day-to-day flexibility.” That’s 81 employees.
Broader programs. She wrote that Pfizer and The Phoenix Cos. added paid paternity leave. Working Mother did not mention this about Phoenix on its list, but it did spell it out for Pfizer, which is actually impressive, relatively speaking, with 35 weeks of maternity leave (15 fully paid) for mothers and 26 weeks of paid leave for fathers and adoptive parents (six weeks fully paid). Even so, it’s still a far cry from what Pfizer employees in Norway and Sweden get.
Vacation time. She mentioned that at Xerox (not a Working Mother “100 best” company), employees can buy an extra vacation week.
Wait. That’s hot?
According to the Center for Economic Policy and Research‘s May 2007 “No-Vacation Nation” report, the United States is the only advanced economy in the world that does not guarantee its workers paid leave.
Here’s a chart from that report.
Xerox has employees in every country listed on the chart, meaning its employees in those countries get up to seven weeks paid leave (vacation and holidays) — guaranteed by law. Xerox employees in the United States buy vacation days.
Whew. Somebody open a window. That’s smokin’ hot.
…
This really deserves its own post, but since she mentioned Shellenbarger by name, I’ll put it here. Former Working Mother magazine editor Lisa Benenson gave publicity tips to corporate benefits managers at a Diversity Roundtable, called “A Journalist’s Perspective: Making the Grade Matters,” in 2002. (Benenson is now editor-in-chief of Hallmark Magazine, giving lessons on the TODAY show about “what flowers say.”)
What does it take to get a Sue Shellenbarger to laud your company in The Wall Street Journal … More importantly, why does it matter?
She referred to journalists who cover work/life issues as “some of your most important advocates.”
The end result of making any of the “Best Of” lists is a bountiful supply of positive news coverage that reflects well on the company, its leadership and employees. The companies that make a top 10 list get incredible publicity. There is nothing like it. There are thousands of media hits all across the country. You just get huge press coverage and recognition for the good work that you’re doing.
Benenson encouraged participants to “seriously consider subjecting their operations to the close scrutiny of journalistic investigation.”
Journalistic investigation? By whom?
Posted by Becky @
5:23 pm |
SLBTM: Unilever/Dove’s ‘real beauty’***
You’ve probably seen this advertisement, brought to you by good global citizen Unilever, maker of Dove products and mastermind behind the Campaign for Real Beauty, which launched in September 2004. Not only did ads show not-size-2 models to inspire positive self-image in women, they were supposed to “support a wider definition of beauty.” The campaign started a program with the Girl Scouts of the USA to “foster self-esteem among girls ages 8 to 17.” And, oh yeah, the ads were supposed to sell skin-firming cream. Hence, the slogan, “Stand Firm and Celebrate Your Curves.” Stand firm. Get it?
Then came the viral video Evolution that Unilever placed on YouTube. Then there was Pro-age. Now we have Onslaught, which warns, “Talk to your daughter before the beauty industry does.” Yeah. Or before Unilever does. Watch Onslaught carefully. It will look familiar in a minute.
Unilever has your cake and eats it too
Apparently for boys ages 8 to 17 (and beyond), however, Unilever uses the “Axe Effect” — complete with V.I.X.E.N.S. (Very Interactive Xtremely Entertaining Naughty Supermodels). After watching the introduction by the naughty maid, who spanked herself with a spatula for being bad (oh, and I can make her spank herself again … and again … and again …), I tried to download the interactive video game, which comes with voice recognition so you can “command” the V.I.X.E.N.S. to do what you want. Either they can tell I’m not a 12-year-old boy or every 12-year-old boy in the world is trying to download it at the same time.
I moan
I did get to the point of getting the application on my computer, when “Naomi” and friends chatted with me for a bit.
“Hi, I’m Naomi. And you know what that spells backwards.” (Nudge, nudge, wink, wink.)
But to make up for not getting the video game, I was able to enjoy the Bom Chicka Wah Wahs, who don’t need no stinkin’ self-affirming firming cream because they’re already a size 2. They don’t need no stinkin’ Campaign for Real Beauty because they’ve already perfected the “O” face while pole dancing, shaking the tassels on their lingerie and crawling like cats. Meow.
Hat tip: Campaign for a Commercial-Free Childhood
***SLBTM = Smells Like Bullshit To Me
Updated to add: Bob Garfield wrote a review in the Oct. 8, 2007, Advertising Age, “‘Onslaught’ is a triumph — if you don’t count the hypocrisy.” That’s the headline in the magazine. Online it’s “Dove’s New ‘Onslaught’ Ad a Triumph.” He sings the praises of the ad, saying that it “should get an Oscar,” and “Standing ovation here.”
A worthy cause, a brilliant strategy, a flawless video. It all amounts to something very close to perfection. So, yes, absolutely, four stars.
Just when I started squirming, he dropped this bomb.
Damn, if it just weren’t for the nagging hypocrisy of it all.
He went on to explain that Dove is a brand from Unilever, which also manufactures and markets the Axe/Lynx brand and Slim-Fast. As for the public-relations firm that produced the video, Ogilvy & Mather, “in a bit of horrifying/delicious irony,” he said, is the U.S. agency for the Barbie doll (Mattel).
(Originally posted Oct. 11, 2007)
Posted by Becky @
3:00 pm |
