You wouldn’t buy the wrong sized shoes... yet PR has a few shoes on the wrong feet

“If it’s not measured, it’s not managed” – A concept that remains decisively fixed in my mind when reflecting on the contentious issue of measurement for the PR discipline. However, ‘earned media’ where customers become the channel leads PROs into great difficulty as they lack control over generated content and are unable to ascertain the scale of word of mouth and viral campaigns, therefore are the ideals of establishing a universal set of metrics for the profession realistic and even so, can they ever be truly reliable? Davies (2009) contends a broader, longer-term view of the social media landscape should be implemented, as short-term analysis drives initial results but fails to demonstrate how brand perceptions evolve over time. The CIPR 2011 Social Media Measurement Guidelines identify this in their recommendation of an influence rating/ranking recognising that influence can change over time. However it is important to note, these guidelines are still a ‘work in progress’. 

With a lack of consensus over the applicability of conventional metrics to social media or clearly defined best practices for measuring its influence, it is difficult for PROs to evaluate fixed objectives for online campaigns (Gillin, 2008). However, one metric which is not accepted for social media is advertising value equivalence (AVE), formerly implemented for measuring traditional print and broadcast coverage, there is simply no AVE for a ‘Tweet’, blog mentions or Facebook fan pages (Wallace, 2010). However, there are a range of metrics established; unique browsers, average time spent on sites, frequencies are just a handful, but before implementing tools of measurement PROs need to determine whether they are measuring financial/relationship outcomes, social capital or rankings/the conversation index (Paine, 2007).

The Conversation Index formulated by Boyd (Cited, Paine, 2007) is a valuable tool for PROs. Measuring the degree of conversation generated through counting the number of comments posted and track backs  is ideally suited to PR; a discipline which seeks to engage and strengthen relationships with key publics. Effectively evaluating quality is just as important as quantity, if not more so; content analysis measures perceptions of organisations/brands by pinpointing key messages and themes. Rankings are simply not enough when it comes to PR although can be useful when correlated with other media tactics specifically as rankings are based upon the number of links to your site and how interesting individuals find it (Paine, 2007). Yet as Solis (2010) indicates; ‘It’s important to understand that in social networks, influence is not derived by the quantity of followers, friends, clicks, or “likes.” Nor is it discernible by the frequency of which one participates in their respective communities. While these serve as indicators of influence, they are not necessarily constant factors in its quantification’. Pete Cashmore; chief executive of Mashable is the most influential Briton on Twitter; not because he has 2, 276, 238 followers but because of the level of social activity he generates.

Let’s look at how the above metrics can be applied; Lauren Goodger recently launched the product - Laurens Way Tan. Using Twitter and Facebook as a platform to promote the new product, PROs could:

- Measure the number of individuals who click through to the website and ‘Shop Laurens Way’ page on Facebook. Engagement durations vs. Bounce rates.

- Counting the number of comments posted/re-tweets/mentions/track backs.

- Content analysis; whether perceptions are positive, neutral or detrimental. 

- Cross-referencing the Conversation Index with product sales.

- Increased rankings since online campaign launched; Twitter followers, Facebook ‘likes’.

This PR Week article has a great social media case study on measurement and is worth a read to get to grips with the multiplicity of tools and measuring the value of social media coverage:

 Social Media Measurement: The Experts at Work

However inconsistencies arise in analytic tools calling for a standardisation in measurement parameters. Black (2010) identifies that differences occur in how to count visitors based on the concept of sessions. Various design settings count sessions differently, profoundly impacting on reported numbers leading to inaccuracies and incomparable results between sites. Multi-tab browsing can aid in the confusion as users flick intermittently between pages totalling up multiple, separate sessions. Whereas the same activity pattern could be viewed as one session as visitors returning within a given time duration, count as part of the original visit.

Consistency of process is also an issue; as control of processing functions is down to the user. Filtering mechanical traffic from spiders/robots can be set to varying degrees or completely excluded. Users have the capability to manipulate the traffic results despite it being accepted as best practice to filter spiders/robots (Black, 2010).

So you can see where the discrepancies in measurement can arise, highlighting the importance of credible, third party, ‘not-for-profit’ organisations such as BPA Worldwide which retain ‘A Level Playing Field’. As fragmentation occurs and strains on the economy intensify, PROs face stiff competition when pitching to clients as they demand measurable ROI; access to comparable, standardised traffic data which third party websites can provide is highly valuable. Equally it can strengthen a strategy by gauging who, when and what sites to work with in targeting key publics; in effect boosting reputation within the industry.  

Social Media & PR; you could say It's like Elizabeth Taylor & Richard Burton

Guest lecturer Daryl Willcox delivered a highly engaging and thought-provoking lecture on the implications of social media as a strategic communication channel and in shaping the existing media landscape. Encouraging us to use our smart phones to ‘tweet’ our thoughts using the hash tag; #smthefuture not only made the lecture more interactive but strengthened lines of reasoning as to why PROs should be utilising social media. Engaging us through collaboration (tweeting) generated the ‘big conversation’ on #smthefuture with Twitter as a platform to uninhibitedly offer our thoughts (Scott, 2010). It provided an excellent opportunity to monitor dialogue on the topic and it was rational to see how the same principals could be applied to organisations and brands in the online realm.

With stakeholders becoming increasingly active online and engaging in such conversations this highlights the importance of listening since it enables PROs to learn from key publics and shape their communicative messages more effectively. Weber (2007) maintains that listening and engaging with customers requires organisational transparency that builds credibility. As PR professionals are well versed in communication, engagement and conversation, PR is ideally suited as these are the very attributes required for a successful social media strategy (Bussey, 2011). 

However none of this matters if professionals do not implement measurable objectives which set out what they want to achieve. It is increasingly important for clients to understand why they are using social media as opposed to aimlessly jumping on the bandwagon just because their competitors are. Co-operation is essential; social networks offer business a versatile way to interact with both internal and external strategic publics (Safko and Brake). Offering a variety of content and ‘sharing by default’ is one way to do this. Publics want consistency and direct gratification; updating information/statuses once every month simply isn’t enough. As Croft (2007) identifies, the public have developed a crushing need to access news and information practically before it exists and this occurs through social network sites which mushroom exponentially on a daily basis. Response mechanisms are therefore critical and this simultaneously ties in to effective monitoring which facilitates this.

One of the smartest big brands in social media has to be Ford who averted a potential PR disaster in which an internal error led to forum owners receiving cease and desist letters with Ford trademarks, causing outrage. They strategically utilised the transparent and instantaneous nature of social media through Ford’s community manager; Scott Monty. Not only did this offer a more humanistic approach but it ensured customers were able to determine the truth from a reputable source and were continually informed as the situation was being resolved. This reinforces Safko and Brakes (2009) concept of Twitter being a ‘hyper-grapevine news resource’ credited for breaking news on significant, real-time events. It prevented a negative story from materialising virally.

With traditional mainstream media in decline, evident through falling print readerships; the media is experiencing fragmentation as publics are overwhelmed by the diversity of channels. Journalist’s behaviour is changing as 92% now research online (Pavlik, 2008) accentuating the implications for PROs in publishing press releases and valuable content online. With social media revolutionising the communication equation; does this mean we need a rational re-evaluation of what constitutes PR? Are traditional media relations becoming an increasingly marginalised channel of communication?

With any organisation/brand branching out online and into social media arises the issue of regulation and ethics. As boundaries between audience and producer are vanishing; user-generated content (UGC) is replacing professional labour and re-orientating the economy. This ‘participatory media’ decentralises the technology used as users increasingly regulate their own behaviour (Foucault, 1975). But, is this supposed sense of control simply deceptive as ‘data mining’ technologies are rapidly advancing? It is critiqued that creativity is defined as a mechanised (generated) and commodifiable property, ascribed market-determined value and that UGC’s dynamic innovations often fall under the proprietary jurisdiction of transnational capitalism (Shepherd, 2009) which would insinuate it is simply immaterial labour; further reinforced by the dubious privacy policies of social media sites. 

However, social media can be an effective channel to promote ethical activities; dataveillance can be seen as a tactic to pinpoint influentials who could significantly enhance a campaigns reach. Equally it enables PROs to monitor information more effectively and how to target users who could benefit from being involved in positive social movements. Listening also enables PROs to determine which social issues to address whilst humanising the organisation/brand and can encourage spontaneous and innovative ways to help others produce tangible benefits (Charles, 2010). Yahoo generated a successful global campaign; Random Acts of Kindness. Over 300,000 updates were posted by Yahoo users and employees with their stories of helping others.

So the question is; can privacy issues surrounding ‘dataveillance’ be counterbalanced for the will of the good? 

Is the Internet revolutionising activism?

Is the internet giving rise to the online public sphere, with its global reach, decentralisation of information, speed of accessibility and permanence as an online space? Are the ideals of democratic participation within reach as communications become more inclusive and ideas are given voice? The boundaries of the public sphere are continually changing most acutely through the commercialisation of the press which is corruptive as celebrity cultures pervade the agenda at the detriment of public affairs (Poor, 2005). 

Habermas (1991; 1962) conceptualised the public sphere consisting of three vital elements which are significant to its existence online; formulated through mediated discussion, offering new spaces of discourse providing voice to those previously excluded from issues of governance and ideas judged on merits as opposed to a speakers social standing. However as critiques point out, the hegemonic values of the elite are subtly reinforced through the media which re-presents the realities implicated within social, economic and political relationships (Devereux, 2007). Since civic life is a minor area of interest this does pose the question as to whether we do only read the ‘Daily Me’ as Sunstein (2001, cited Poor 2005) suggests and whether political discussions are composed solely by the informed elite.

This leads me onto an article I read on the media landscape and political diversity. Since newspapers and media are known to have some degree of political bias; it was established within social media that whether the exposure level was subtle or straightforward it helped users gain diverse opinions (An et al, 2011). This got me thinking; with strong advocates of social filters surely this highlights the influence between publics, autonomous from state and economic power? Equally it shows how individuals are predisposed to public affairs extending across the political spectrum which refutes the conception that only the rich and cultured are engaged. It appears the internet is capable of becoming ‘the great democratiser’.

UK Uncut is an example of a public sphere which leads into the topic of digital activism as the internet provides ‘forums for organising, communicating, publishing and taking direct action’ (Spinello and Tavani, 2004). UK Uncut set the agenda for mass protest against large corporations evading taxes and the payout of ‘fat cat’ bonuses in city banks. This was a strike out at the government’s efforts to reduce the deficit by cutting public services; a policy based upon ideology, not necessity. News broadcasts reported on the protests as publics organised themselves together to build resistance to this austerity. The internet provided a communication infrastructure enabling the widespread dissatisfaction with governance to progress into a social movement (Joyce, 2010). On their website, activists are encouraged to organise action themselves as no centrally planned actions exist; they are explicit in the fact it is ‘your movement’.


Video: Daniel Garvin from UK Uncut talks about the campaign, raising some significant issues over digital activism.

Joyce (2010) uses the term ‘Meta-Activism’ which focuses on building a toolkit allowing online potential activists to become politically and socially active. Social media significantly propelled this movement forward as the 'big conversation' stretched across diverse platforms with no restraints. UK Uncut only existed as #ukuncut, a hash tag somebody dreamt up the night before protesters shut down Vodafone’s flagship store. As actions in the online realm synchronized with protest in the physical one, #ukuncut began trending across the UK (Joyce, 2010). This is evocative of the hype cycle since technology triggered the buzz in which expectations became inflated by the media (Phillips and Young, 2009). In this case, the power of going viral spread to fifty-five towns and resulted in 27,303 followers on Twitter and 25,581 members on Facebook signifying enlightened usage and demonstrating how activism reached a plateau of productivity. Joyce (2010, cited MacManus, 2010) advocates the greatest factor which determines the utility of an application to activists is scale and ‘use neutrality’. UK Uncut did both; Twitter was able to reach the critical mass of users activating the network effects which generated awareness and integrated shared ideals.

Word of mouth is an influential tool and social media is key to going viral by tracing connections through trusted networks and disseminating information quickly. Even so, I find myself questioning whether the power harnessed by the internet is too overwhelming for the minority who use it as a medium to exchange insults, known as ‘flaming’. Anonymity simply facilitates this dissent and domination by extremists which has serious consequences for offline actions, as demonstrated by protesters who saw an opportunity to cause anarchy.

Strong implications arise for corporate communications and for PROs. The clue is in the title; Public Relations. The public sphere is a haven of issues which if monitored and managed effectively can identify and enhance strategic opportunities. Mapping the conversational landscape can help identify issues, establish two contrasting sides of a debate and pinpoint key influential’s (Joyce, 2010). This forms the basis for an activist ‘political terrain map’, identifying potential allies to engage with. Marmite is an example of a brand that capitalised on the build-up to the UK General Election by holding an election of its own between ‘The Love Party’ and ‘The Hate Party’ by assembling an official group of ‘cabinet ministers’. Implementing a ‘social radar’ identified the ideal time to release Marmites ‘party’ information and spread the message through multiple social media platforms when the elections were a hot topic.

Activism can be detrimental to an organisation/brand or equally supportive of their values. As the Web Ecology perspective outlines a new generation of activist tools, these can be used by PROs to either confound ‘threatening’ activists or to internalise activism as part of CSR initiatives. 

The rise of the online public sphere facilitates the ideals of democratic participation, even leading to memetic entropy where there are too many voices and the dissemination of cultural content engenders increasing disorganisation (Joyce, 2010), yet its viral power, instantaneous nature and ability to mobilise action can lead to consensus by challenging the hierarchy.

Where do the boundaries come into play when accelerating cycles of desire?

The act of consumption is significantly changing from the material to the digital; offering very different experiences for the consumer. Digital virtual consumption (DVC) is creating new spaces of identity, embodiment and community (Shields, 2008) which PROs should utilise when publicising and promoting online campaigns. There is an increasing role for PR in DVC as trust and reputation are essential requisites for online websites particularly those which rely on market place ratings and buyer profiles.


Ubiquitous connectivity has enabled the acceleration of the cycles of desire to occur at a rapid pace as consumers engage in a composite of practices such as browsing, monitoring, temporary ownership of virtual representations and material ownership through purchasing (Denegri-Knott, 2010). This has led to time-space compression and in todays ‘have it now’ culture; the quick acquisition of desired goods accelerates the cycle of desire as elusive items are easily found and inexpensive. The opportunity for PR is therefore to ensure the product or service is accessible and promoted extensively; tactics such as SEO, social media and direct messaging frame consumer wants making them more achievable.


Everyone daydreams; conjuring up an idealised lifestyle. It poses excitement, hope, the impetus to strive towards a better self; it is the locus of pleasure seeking in consumption (Denegri-Knott, 2010). DVC provides the relationship between the ideal confinements of the psychological daydreaming activities and material consumption by introducing an interim liminoid position (Shields, 2002; Shields, 2000; Turner, 1988) which duplicitously fuels desires and provides a platform for its actualisation. This results in the consumer becoming more active in the consumption process; this level of interactivity provides an opportunity for PROs to create narratives which give meaning to decision-making using the online environment. Interactivity enables cultural and social exchanges to take place which are the key to credibility. It is the displaced, idealised meanings which ensure consumers consistently want more products (McCracken, 1988). 


Analysing key publics is therefore essential in targeting a campaign more effectively, enabling them to fulfil their wants or to position a product or service as a source for re-igniting desire once satiation occurs. But, does a good narrative balance against the risk? This highlights the importance for PROs to build communication on trust as online privacy arises as a sensitive issue. Disregarding the value of privacy by manipulating personal autonomy and failing to protect customer data could lead to reputational damage of a client. Trust strengthens relationships.

Let’s take All Saints for example, they implement various online strategies in an attempt to ignite desire and accelerate the consumption process:


- Targeted Ads - These appear alongside web pages and are created through monitoring online behaviour and browsing history. However it raises the issue of privacy; PROs need to ensure they achieve optimum levels of privacy where desired levels equate to actual levels when dealing with customers and they are not being invasive in their targeting.


- Email - Direct messages provide information on current promotional codes, sales, new fashion pieces and events. This sets up a cycle of revelation, stimulating the hope to want tangible products on which to attach a daydream (Denegri-Knott, 2010). It further presents the opportunity to re-ignite desire by exposing complementary pieces such as jewellery, shoes, jackets etc. It is an epistemic object of consumption.

- Social media - Facebook and Twitter used as a promotional tool; PR activities (Basement live sessions with musical artists), promote new fashion pieces and interaction with customers.


- Website - Using the shopping basket – Temporary ownership of virtual representations of the desired goods. This accelerates the cycle of desire as consumers are able to place desirable items into the basket and transgress the boundaries of moral valuations dictating what is to be sanctioned as an appropriate purchase (Belk et al, 2003 cited Denegri-Knott, 2010).

However where do the boundaries come into play when accelerating cycles of desire? This leads us into the issue as to how ethical PROs should be in framing these wants which inexorably create false needs. It further questions the extent to which PROs should overstep the boundaries of privacy in targeting publics. With no regulation or legislation in place to effectively deal with digital communications, consumers must accept ‘the reality...online life is a trade’ (Aleks Krotoski, 2010) and that PROs will utilise these online spaces to their advantage to exploit the cycles of desire.