Michael here, checking in with another contribution I’ve made to PR NEWSWIRE’s Investor Uprising. Today I’m tackling the topic of ethical investments. It’s a tough line to walk in today’s world, with less than ideal examples of investments; BP, Toyota and Enron popping up every day of the week. Here I share my basic yet thorough tips on how to keep your investments inline with your personal and professional code of ethics. Five easy questions to ask yourself to make sure you’re investing ethically…”Five Exercises To Work Ethics Into Your Investments”

Recently I’ve started writing for Investor Uprising, PR NEWSWIRE’s online community for focusing on all things investing and finance. “The Spin” (I didn’t choose the name) covers all things communications in relation to investments. I’ll be tackling everything from ethical investments to how those so-called “celebrities” can teach us a lesson or two about our brands.
In this post I do just that, more specifically addressing how Charlie Sheen can actually teach companies a thing or two about attracting investors. No really, he might be the biggest celebrity train-wreck of the past year but he actually did get a couple things right when marketing himself. Without letting the cat any further out of the bag here’s The Spin… “What Charlie Sheen Can Teach Corporate America“

Recently, I posted an article on SMPR’s Facebook page about how the DETROIT NEWS (my hometown newspaper) seemingly threw its ethical codes out the window (not to mention selling its soul) and changed an article to soothe an advertiser’s wallet and ego.  Combined with the latest Groupon fiasco and its ad blunder (I wrote about this issue on A Sorry State), maybe it’s time to skin the cat differently.

So I thought it would be cool to share something that is cool about ethics, specifically talking about how our friends in the advertising industry are making efforts to bring more of an ethical position into their operations.

Check out the following article from ADVERTISING AGE on the industry’s attempt to get more ethical.  These are really good ideas; what do y’all think?

The site may be All Things Digital, but their work is All Things Ethical.

Among the many things I read online and in print, I am a big fan of the Wall Street Journal’s “All Things Digital.”  Having been engrossed in media relations for most of my 15-plus years in the business, I have found that Kara Swisher is among the most insightful journalists out there. Every time I read a story from her, I learn something.

I was reading her most recent post about Google’s seemingly pending acquisition of Groupon, and noticed a line at the end of her story:  Please see this disclosure related to me and Google.

I was shocked–in a very good way–when I saw a headline that read, “Kara’s Ethics Statement.”  What was even more cool was the choice of words that Kara offered to her readers:  “Here is a statement of my ethics and coverage policies. It is more than most of you want to know, but, in the age of suspicion of the media, I am laying it all out.” Kudos to Kara for sharing with her readers how she feels about the integrity of her work.

Here at SMPR, we hear the stories about PR pros and journalists, alike, who are called into question about the types of work they do.  With many of our clients, we work with them to draft ethical mission statements in addition to traditional mission statements & key messages to distinguish “sales” from “beliefs.”  In both cases, people need to have trust in what the company does, but how you say each has to be completely different.

Some of the best journalist relationships we have are based on ethics.  We know what people will and won’t cover.  We know that when we position a company, that we are prepared to do so objectively.  If there is something negative about a client that someone brings to our attention and we know it exists, we won’t spin things.  We’ll be honest and upfront–and expect our clients to do the same thing.

We would hope that more journalists follow Kara Swisher’s lead and print their ethics statements for all to see.  For now on, I will still continue to read Kara’s work; I will just appreciate it that much more.

Disclosure on my part:  I have never worked with Kara directly, but hope to one day when the right client comes along.

Could using a PDA be bad for your corporate health?

Über-intern Whitney checks in with a very smart analysis of how technology could impede the practice of corporate communications.  Take it away, Whitney…

Since the advent of smartphones people have had a new challenge placed in front of them.  It isn’t how often you can check in on Foursquare or how fast you can look up a fact to prove a point.  In fact, it’s a challenge of etiquette, of how we as a society are choosing to balance face-to-face interactions against online relationships.

Recently Gini Dietrich covered this on her blog, Spin Sucks. After reading her post we felt compelled to chime in as well.

If you look around a coffee shop, restaurant or on the train it’s safe to say you’ll see at least a dozen people with their phones out, waiting for them to light up with an alert that something is happening in their digital world.  When people are this focused on maintaining their networks online they are often neglecting the relationship and networking opportunities right next to them—in the “real world.”

In the not so distant past, it was viewed as rude to answer a phone call during a meeting; now, it’s practically expected.  It’s hard to make a blanket statement saying that everyone should ignore their phones while conducting business, at the workplace or when out with colleagues and friends.

Still, SMPR encourages clients to think about how one’s corporate reputation—not to mention one’s personal brand—can be hindered if your PDA runs your life and not the other way around.

Remember this—people with whom you network over the Web cannot see that you’re ignoring a client when Tweeting during a meeting, but that client sure can. What will they tweet, think or say about you after their face-to-face interaction with you where you were MIA?

Over the last few years, there have been more than a fair share of  “pot shots” thrown at PR people who perform less than what is expected of them.  Recently, there was a case of a firm posting favorable comments on iTunes–and the FTC called them out.  Without question, they deserved to be caught.  And as most cases like this play out, many media outlets take any chance they can get for rolling PR under the proverbial bus.

What happens, though, when the tables are turned?  What happens when media outlets don’t do the necessary fact-checking to make sure THEIR work is ethical, objective and above ground?

I bring this up as I was sent an online video from CRAIN’S CHICAGO BUSINESS this week.  In it, an events company account executive touts how good this one restaurant was, how amazing some of the dishes were, how you couldn’t walk out of there without feeling like you were at one of the best restaurants in Chicago.  If I were their PR person, I would be ecstatic with such a piece.

Yet, I have to wonder if the people putting this segment together did their homework about the restaurant, the source and the history between the two.

• The account executive mentioned in the video just happens to be the daughter of one of the restaurant company’s top executives.  I know this because I met them both at a charity function, and I entered the father’s business card into my Rolodex.
• The father was a top executive at one of Chicago’s TV stations, so it is my business to know who works where in the media, as well as who moves on.  His name is recognizable, so it piqued my curiosity to confirm that the daughter was the same person I met at the event.
• The story neglects to mention that this account executive also used to work at this restaurant at one time in her career.

Those who know me how much I respect business media, and I LOVE CRAIN’S here in Chicago.  It is such a good media outlet and enterprise, that it surprised me to see something like this story actually making it to the public.

I am passionate about ethics in both PR and journalism.  This story reads and feels awkward, especially since it’s my job to know the city’s “who’s who.”  This is not the fair, balanced and objective journalism I am used to seeing in CRAIN’S; it looks like Daddy’s little girl is promoting Daddy’s company on CRAIN’S dime.

Doing some digging around, I learned that people at CRAIN’S don’t produce the segments; they come from the group hosting the segment.  Still, there is a level of responsibility that comes into play here, and something SMPR takes very seriously:

• In all of our endeavors, we are supposed to fact-check, do our homework and make sure that nothing that we communicate on behalf of our clients could be called into question.  If we do it, our clients are smart enough to know about it–and they will show us the door.
• We have a responsibility and “code of honor” to respect the journalists, analysts and other groups who we work with.
• As PR counselors, we have a responsibility to help our clients tell the truth to all of their constituents and influencers, even it the truth ruffles feathers.

Maybe the folks at CRAIN’S who were provided the video package didn’t know the truth; hopefully, they know about this and will do something about it.  I trust CRAIN’S will do something; that is what good journalists do.

If we were counseling the restaurant company, we would advise them to come forth and acknowledge the relationship, discuss their knowledge of the story being done and (if needed) who was at the root of the video being done–the daughter or the father.

I’ll continue to pick up my CRAIN’S every week and read the daily news digests in my mailbox.  But when it comes to getting objective restaurant reviews, I’ll go somewhere else.