Posts Tagged ‘brand’

I spend my days helping clients develop and implement PR campaigns designed to promote the company in such a compelling way that its key audience will respond positively to what the company is communicating.  Ultimately, the goal is always to build momentum and help the company achieve its potential.

So given that professional experience, it should be relatively simple to diagnose the PR problems Israel is having and prescribe a certain program to improve the situation.

And it is simple, but not in the way you might think.

Much has been written over the past few weeks – ever since “The Flotilla Affair” – about the overall weakness of Israel’s PR, both when crises hit and in general.  In fact, journalist Yair Lapid wrote a column about it on June 4.  And the Jerusalem Post wrote an extensive article this past weekend about the branding of Jerusalem, in the context of “The Affair” and the regional conflict as a whole.  And they all brought wonderful examples of how and why Israel’s PR has missed the mark.

But I’m afraid they’ve missed the mark as well.

Lapid laments Information Minister Yuli Edelstein’s frustrating cell phone contact system.  And he’s right.  Edelstein’s system of screening and passwords stinks.  But he’s also wrong, because a better contacting system for Edelstein wouldn’t help Israel’s image one bit, due to a much larger problem, which I will mention soon enough.  Fixing his voicemail wouldn’t help fight the incredible PR machine our enemies have built.

And the J. Post article misses the point as well.  Here’s a short excerpt:

As the dust begins to settle around the flotilla events, Jerusalem is in the midst of starting its new public relations campaign, “Something Good Is Happening in Jerusalem.� The municipality is pushing aggressively to recast the city as a cultural destination, whose international importance in the world of art and music is just as celebrated as the city’s historical and religious significance.

This being Jerusalem, a few problems have cropped up.

“Jerusalem’s brand is undermined by troubles and how the media portrays it,� says Foster George, a tourist from London in Jerusalem for a week as he strolls through Jaffa Gate for the first time.

“The image of Jerusalem is so tied to Israel abroad which, unfortunately, especially now, is not so positive,� adds another tourist, Kate Engberg from Gothenburg, Sweden.

The problem, this article suggests, is that as long as Israel is not able to separate the politics from the tourism, Jerusalem’s tourism industry is going to suffer.  But again, the J. Post is incorrect.  Jerusalem is the center of the religious universe, and as such is going to be the hottest point on Earth for conflict.  That is the deal and we must all understand and even embrace that.  But this is irrelevant as well, in terms of the larger question about Israel’s PR, although we are getting closer to the point.

Another PR complaint over the years has been the lack of Israel spokespeople who are able to speak strong English.  Well, we now have Mark Regev at the wheel, one of the best I’ve ever seen, as well as Michael Oren in the U.S., who is also fantastic.

And yet, Israel has had one of its worst PR runs over the last 12 months that it has had in decades.  Doesn’t this seem strange to you?

How can it be that we did better PR during the post-9/11 phase, when Ariel Sharon was prime minister, than we are doing now, when U.S.-educated Binyamin Netanyahu is at the helm?

When you consider the overall futility of the three above arguments of 1. Logistical ineptitude (the Edelstein example), 2. Brushing aside the negative, in favor of the positive (the Jerusalem tourism example) and 3. Native-English-speaking spokespeople (The Regev-Oren-Bibi example), there is only one conclusion that should be drawn.

It’s not about any of these things.

To understand why we are failing, we must first look at why the other side is succeeding.  And the answer to that question is simple: A Unified Message.

It wouldn’t matter if Edelstein drank Red Bull 24 hours a day and was 100% available for all requested interviews.  Because an hour later, someone from the government opposition will submit to an interview and completely contradict what Edelstein has said.

It doesn’t matter that Jerusalem has wonderful views, great restaurants and almost-perfect weather, especially this time of year.  Because the world is being told – by Jewish-Israelis – on a regular basis that Jerusalem is a place of conflict, and that it is all the fault of the Jews.

And it doesn’t matter that we have our strongest international spokespeople since the days of Golda Meir and Abba Eban.

Because we do not have that item that can often be the difference between success and failure for any PR campaign.  In fact, it should be the cornerstone of any campaign.

It is the unified message.

After 9/11, Israel was unified, not only in its condemnation of the attack, but in its message to the world of “You see!  This is what we’ve been going through!  Now, do you understand us?”

But time has “healed,” and we have once again descended to our previous disagreements and ideologies.  We are not united.

And sadly, if Israel itself is not unified – as our enemies are, for the purpose of destroying Israel – then there will be no unified message, and we will continue to lose the PR battle, even if we are right.

So, please do not waste your time analyzing the PR strategy – or even lack thereof – or tactical approach of the Israeli government.  It’s not about that.  It’s the same problem that has plagued the Jewish people for centuries. We can’t unify.  Even about a message.  Even when our future is at stake.

I often ask myself, how is it that many Israeli companies that receive tens of millions of dollars in funding … not to mention the tens of millions in profits, are unable to spend a reasonable amount per month on a PR campaign?

Today, I finally realized the answer.  It is simple.  They are stupid.

Stupid means that a company can spend tens of thousands of dollars on a single advertorial, because the CEO likes to see his/her face in a magazine, but won’t spend that kind of money on a PR campaign because there is no guaranteed ROI.  Of course, it doesn’t matter that the advertorial they bought gave no ROI either.  At least the CEO can show the picture to his army buddies, right?

Stupid means that a company embarks on a branding campaign that does not have market research as one of its preliminary elements.  And when the branding firm – which the company paid $50,000 to develop the new branding, unveils a name that sounds ridiculously similar to another Israeli company’s name, and the color scheme does as well, the company is forced to accept it because, well, they paid $50,000, and it would be a shame to let that money go to waste.

Stupid means that a company believes it only has $1,000 per month for international PR, so it hires a second-rate freelancer to do the job, when that money would be better spent on Google Ads or, frankly, snacks for the staff.  Any PR firm willing to accept $1,000 per month for international services can’t get the job done.  I assure you of that.

Stupid means that a company spends $150,000 on a small booth at a gigantic trade show, but won’t spend a few thousand on a PR firm to secure them interviews while they are there.

Stupid means that a company produces items that are marketed for tens of thousands of dollars apiece – and bought by thousands of customers, but doesn’t have the money to commit to a momentum-building PR campaign that, over the course of a year, will cost the company the same amount as a single one of their products will cost a single customer.

Of course, there are also smart Israeli companies, and they are a pleasure to work with.

Smart means that a company gives its agency access to as much information as possible so the agency can decide which items may be newsworthy.

Smart means that a company provides its agency an efficient, but reasonable budget, so the agency will feel motivated to provide outstanding service.

Smart means that a company is just as interested in the constructive feedback a journalist gives when the answer is “no,” as they are in securing the “hit.”

Smart means that a company considers PR to be not only a marketing function, but a corporate function as well, since positive PR will impact all audiences positively and negative PR will impact all audiences negatively.

So here’s the kicker, which is also simple …

Over my five years here, I’ve found a direct correlation between a company’s ability to be smart versus stupid, and a company’s likelihood to be successful versus unsuccessful.