The story spread like wildfire, with influential users such as Stephen Fry going on to tweet the link.

Except, as picked up relatively early on by a few eagle-eyed folk out there (or, cynics), the story turned out to be a hoax, as confirmed this morning by its creators.

It seems to be exceptionally common to be taken in by hoaxes on the web these days – and Joe Public isn’t the only one whose gullibility has been shown to be in robust health. But whilst you might not expect to scrutinise the source of a story you see on Twitter as you’re having your afternoon cuppa, you’d hope that our esteemed members of the press might dig a little deeper when checking their facts…

Some weeks ago, the media was awash with stories about Raoul Moat, who shot several people in Northumbria in July. These were understandably sombre pieces, given the nature of the issue. But one, appearing in the Daily Star, cried outrage about a Raoul Moat-themed version of the popular computer game, Grand Theft Auto, that had apparently been planned.

Except, it hadn’t.

The gaming press was understandably stunned that the piece had made it to the pages of a national tabloid, and the makers of the game justifiably demanded an apology – one in which the paper admitted that they “made no attempt to check the accuracy of the story before publication and did not contact Rockstar Games prior to publishing the story. We also did not question why a best selling and critically acclaimed fictional games series would choose to base one of their most popular games on this horrifying real crime event”.

Oops.

(In case you’re interested, the original piece has been removed from the Star’s site, but you can see a screen grab over at the Media Blog, and the full apology here.)

But sometimes, you shouldn’t even need to call people to fact-check a non-story, because all the facts are right there in front of you.

And, amidst all the coverage of the iPhone 4’s lack of… well, coverage, you could be forgiven for thinking that Steve Jobs probably wasn’t the happiest of chaps. And so, as a journalist, when you see a tweet from the @ceoSteveJobs Twitter account that suggests there might be a rather large recall of one of the planet’s hottest new products, you could also be forgiven for leaping on the story.

Of course, what’s unforgiveable is failing to notice that @ceoSteveJobs’ biography quite clearly states that of course this is a parody account before going on to print the story as fact.

(Again, the story was removed, fairly sharpish – but screen grabs are around if you know where to look.)

As Twitter might say: #fail

And it’s not just the tabloids that get taken in.

As thousands of festival-goers were enjoying themselves at the Big Chill in Herefordshire last weekend, a small piece accompanying a picture in Saturday’s Independent alleged that the festival had started life as the “Wanky Balls” festival.

A quick look at a recent (and again, given the transient nature of things online, no longer there) shot of the Big Chill’s Wikipedia entry would suggest that there might have been just a little too much eagerness to get the piece filed…

With the changing nature of technology, it’s safe to assume that journalists will continue to find new and different ways of sourcing their stories. But the old adage remains: don’t believe everything you read.

Bookmark It

Fans of the tennis aren’t the only ones to have made the most of the glorious sunshine during the past couple of weeks.

With temperatures hitting over 30°C in some parts of the country, the recent summery conditions have also been hugely beneficial to the flourishing English wine industry.

The welcome warmth and sunshine has come at a time when vines planted across the country are going into flower.

This boosts the chances of an excellent crop of domestic grapes during the harvest when it comes later in the year.

An Indian summer, like last year’s, would see the fruit ripen to perfect levels required to make World Class wines.

English wines are firmly in the ascendancy, with 24 medals won at this year’s acclaimed International Wine Challenge, as well as a clutch of other awards.

Sales of the wines are flourishing as their appeal takes hold: in 1999, sales of English wine were worth £10.6m. This had almost doubled last year (2009) to £20m.

Wines from areas such as Kent replicate the taste of champagne, because they use the ‘holy trinity’ of champagne grapes (pinot noir, chardonnay and pinot meunier) in a region with the perfect soil and climate.

The Kent coast is only 80 miles north of Champagne and the geology of the chalk sub-soil and the topography is almost identical.

The industry is also becoming increasingly professional, as experienced winemakers from around the world come to England to work with English wines.

Chapel Down wines, based in Tenterden, have recently recruited New Zealander, Andrew Parley, as their Head Winemaker.

Andrew has worked on wines across the world, including a stint in the renowned Hunter Valley in Marlborough in his home country.

Frazer Thompson, CEO of Chapel Down wines, says:

“Without wishing to tempt Fate, we’re optimistic that this will be another great year for English wines.

“We still have to get through the rest of the summer, so it’s too early to predict for certain how the harvest will turn out, but we’re really very hopeful.

“The consistency of our wines is of paramount importance to us.

“Making great wines year after year is crucial if we’re to build on the excellent reputation that English wines already enjoy.

“We had a good harvest last year, and we’re starting to see the results of that in the wines coming through now.

“Another great harvest will really cement the position of English wines as truly world-class.”

ends

Bookmark It

I had just begun.

When I was two,

I was nearly new.

When I was three,

I was hardly me.

When I was four,

I was not much more.

When I was five,

I was just alive.

But now I am six,

I’m as clever as clever.

So I think I’ll be six

now and forever.

Happy Birthday to us! Six today.

Bookmark It

286 espresso cups transformed by some of the world’s most renowned artists 

16th June - 17th September 2010

5 city tour:  London, Brighton, Cardiff, Birmingham & Manchester 

A three month exhibition, twenty years in the making and conceived to combine the aesthetic pleasure of art with the sensory pleasure of coffee, will make its UK debut this June.

“Strada presents the illy Art Collection”, featuring 286 espresso coffee cups interpreted by some of the greatest artists of our generation, including Jeff Koons, Robert Rauschenberg and Marina Abramovic, aims to transform the everyday act of drinking a cup of coffee into an experience involving all the senses. 

The exhibition – part of Strada’s 10th birthday celebrations – blends illy’s passion for all things beautiful and its appreciation of modern art.

The Collection also includes cup designs from some of the most influential contributors to film and music. 

Works by Francis Ford Coppola, David Byrne, Federico Fellini and Pedro Almódovar will also be showcased.

The Collection though is not just about ‘famous names’. 

Over the past 20 years illy has also collaborated with lesser known artists and students from all over the world to give them an opportunity to express themselves through its porcelain cups.

The illy Art Collection began when the company changed the design of its espresso cup in 1990.

Ernesto Illy wanted to create a new, exclusively shaped, cup that could also stand on its own as a work of art. 

He contacted the designer and architect Matteo Thun to design it and the “illy” espresso cup, as a signature piece, was born.  

Twenty years on and the exclusively shaped cup is now used in more than 50,000 of the best restaurants and coffee bars in the world, including the Strada restaurants hosting the UK exhibition. 

The restaurant group has served illy alongside its contemporary Italian food since it opened its first restaurant a decade ago.

The illy Art Collection cups, all signed, numbered and produced in limited editions, are coveted by art lovers and coffee lovers alike. 

Rare cups, such as those initially made by Thun in 1990, can fetch as much as £2,500 in private sale.

Carlo Bach, artistic director at illycaffè, says:

“With each espresso cup, we are creating a piece of art that can be viewed, touched and cradled in the hand. 

“The Collection elevates and enhances our everyday coffee experience. 

“It illustrates our passion for all things beautiful and well-made.”

“Strada presents the illy Art Collection” runs from 16th June – 17th September 2010 at Strada restaurants across the UK and is free of charge. 

Known for its great Italian food and stylish, contemporary surroundings, Strada will offer the prefect backdrop for this showcase. 

The exhibition is open seven days a week from 11.30 am until 10.30 pm. 

Visit www.strada.co.uk for further details.

Bookmark It

But the remaining official FIFA partners and sponsors have failed to get onto people’s radar. 

Just five per cent of fans associate Budweiser with the Tournament. 

The research shows the huge strides Coca-Cola has made in the past four years to deepen its association with the sport. 

Visa will be particularly concerned to note that slightly more fans (8%) associate rival (and Champion’s League sponsor) MasterCard at this summer’s Tournament.

Usual suspect Nike (18%) tops the list of brands winning the guerilla World Cup War – beating many brands investing in official ‘partner’ and ‘sponsor’ status.

The study also highlights that brands that have chosen to link their association with the World Cup through the England team are faring very poorly. 

Kit supplier Umbro has an unprompted awareness score of 4%, followed by Carlsberg (3%) and Nationwide (2%). 

Mark Cooper, a director at Van Communications, says:

“Traditionally sponsors want their marketing campaigns to make an impact before the start of the Tournament because, once the first ball has been kicked, then little gets in the way of the action on the pitch. 

“Any brand not yet resonating with football fans has a very narrow window of opportunity left to them in which to get their act together and raise their profile.”

Bookmark It

British pubs and bars are spending millions of pounds to turn their venues into ‘virtual football stadia’, in a bid to bring more customers through their doors.

Pub groups across the country are investing in costly 3D and high-definition TV upgrades in preparation for climax of the football season, FA Cup, Champions League and the World Cup.

Research by the Walkabout sports bar chain amongst over 2,000 people shows that 25% of British men plan to watch at least three World Cup matches in a pub during the Tournament.

The Walkabout chain is one bar group heavily backing the rising popularity of 3D TV.  It says it will be the first sports bar chain in the UK to offer 3D viewing across its estate. 

According to Walkabout’s own research, there is a real appetite for watching World Cup games in 3D.  They claim that a third (33%) of the nation sports fans, under the age of 35, are interested in prospect of watching a World Cup game in 3D.

FIFA has announced plans to deliver 3D images from up to 25 matches in South Africa.

Just nine pubs showed Sky’s first 3D match, between Arsenal and Manchester United, back in January. Such is the speed at which 3D technology has been adopted by pubs that Sky predicts that over a thousand pubs and clubs will have a 3D-ready TV set installed in time for tomorrow’s 3D channel launch and the Premier League clash between Manchester United and Chelsea.

James Mawer, commercial manager at Walkabout, said: “3D football in pubs will be the next best thing to actually being at a match. 

“We know our venues will be busy and, with space at a premium, the only way to accommodate more people will be to ‘build upwards’ with a banked seating area.” 

Bookmark It

However this underdog has managed to bark its way into most national papers and leave its mark all over social media sites, leaving the Beeb instead to scamper off with its tail between its legs. Thanks to the noise some of its listeners made, the station is now enjoying more listeners than ever before. The ‘Save BBC 6 Music’ Facebook group has 170,834 members to date. As the top dogs should have realised, anyone can take to the social media stand and fight their corner, in front or an ever increasing and increasingly mutinous audience. Although only half a million were listening, the whole population was reading, blogging and tweeting.

Throw in a few famous faces and there you have it, a recipe for a successful rebellion. With so many sets of eager ears to now preach its troubles to, it was inevitable that hundreds of budding insurgents would take up the cause and fight for the station’s survival. Thousands will be defending the station’s existence just by tuning in. As I sit here with 6 Music happily humming away in the background, I will freely admit I would never have turned over had it not been for the flurry of press coverage the campaign received.

Ironically, it is the BBC we should feel sorry for. Although it has been long forgotten in the wake of the protest, there was valid reason as to why it was number 6 they pointed the finger at. Purely and simply, 6 Music just did not have that many listeners in comparison to its radio relatives. It all seems fair enough to me actually. But hey, it just goes to show what an effective campaign can be waged when the public puts their minds, and their keyboards, to it.

Let the lesson be learned, never give the British public something to complain about. It is what we do best. Most are just waiting for near enough any excuse to mount the soapboxes, reach for the megaphones, and in this day and age, connect to the World Wide Web and blog. Even if 6 Music must face the final curtain, it will surely go out with a hell of a bang thanks to the generous sprinkling of gunpowder that social media added to the mix.

Sadly it seems that this lesson is taking a little too long to sink in for some. Nestlé has joined the ever growing list of companies that have grossly underestimated the influence of social media sites. After some of it employees snubbed the constructive feedback Nestlé were getting from their use of palm oil on their Facebook page, the moderators made some rather destructive comments, finally committing the cardinal social media sin by deleting said criticisms. Cue resulting carnage. Nestlé should have known better than to try and hush dissenting voices in such a rudimentary fashion.

A comment from one protester summed up the fiasco rather eloquently. “Hey PR moron. Thanks, you are doing a far better job than we could ever achieve in destroying your brand.”

Quite.

Bookmark It

One of the two stories in question over that past fortnight has been the call to reveal the identity of one of the killers of James Bulger; the other is the recent divulging of Mark Owen’s affairs.

Before anyone kicks off saying that it’s deeply distasteful to compare the two, I’m going to make the argument that both stories highlight a concept that’s hugely important in journalism: public interest.

Talking about the case of Owen in PR Week, PHA Media senior consultant Phil Taylor spoke about how well the case had been handled by Owen’s team: ‘The Sun clearly had evidence on Mark, and he’s clearly done a deal. But coming out with it all at once stops the drip-drip of scandal stories. He’s drawn a line under it.”

The case may well have been well-handled by the PRs involved, but an interesting point to consider here is whether the Sun should have run the story at all.

Currently, there’s no formal definition of public interest. The term’s generally taken to mean “common wellbeing” – a matter can be said to be in the public interest if it has the potential to “adversely affect any person at any time in their life in any situation” if it’s not put into the public arena; the National Union of Journalists has its own definition that it lists here.

Because it has no strict definition, it’s become a little too easy for media outlets to use the concept as rather a post hoc defence when accused of printing stories that they maybe shouldn’t have – something that I imagine could apply to the Owen case because I would argue that both stories I’ve referred to here probably, actually, aren’t in the public interest.

There’s a huge difference between something that’s in the public interest and something that’s merely interesting to the public. And whilst a story about a supposedly squeaky-clean, ex-boy band member having extra-marital affairs might be thrilling in its minutiae, it has no bearing on the wellbeing of the British public at large.

Likewise, the current identity of John Venables isn’t something that the public has a right to know. What possible public interest can be served by making that information widely available? If he has, as suggested, committed other crimes, he should be tried by a jury on the basis of the evidence in that case; not on feelings of vengeance related to one past. We don’t have a right to know who he is, merely because we quite fancy knowing.

Turning the concept on its head, it’s also worth bearing in mind that ‘public interest’ works both ways. Whilst it might be in the public interest to print a particular story, any media outlet using this as a defence must in this case be absolutely certain that it’s in full possession of the correct facts (if that’s not a tautology). Because, surely, printing such a piece that may mislead presumably flies in the face of the concept; it can’t be in the public interest to be misled.

Journalists and PRs alike need to know that what they’re printing – and handling in print – isn’t just feeding our curiosity if there’s something more fundamental at stake.

Bookmark It

Currently doing the rounds is a link to an article by Clifford Stoll from a 1995 issue of Newsweek. In it, Stoll gripes about the hype surrounding an invention that he felt was “oversold”. That invention? The internet.

A paragraph of Stoll’s protest reads:

Try reading a book on disc. At best, it’s an unpleasant chore: the myopic glow of a clunky computer replaces the friendly pages of a book. And you can’t tote that laptop to the beach. Yet Nicholas Negroponte, director of the MIT Media Lab, predicts that we’ll soon buy books and newspapers straight over the Intenet. Uh, sure.

Hmm. Yes, well.

The irony of course is that, whilst he bemoans reading on screen, it’s almost certain that more people have seen the e-version of his article some fifteen years after it was written than ever saw the print copy at the time – which, presumably, no one has lying around on their desk any more…

For PRs, this sort of thing is worth bearing in mind. Every so often – and sometimes now, more regularly than that – things come along that, at first glance, we’re all too quick to sniff at.

Way back when, there was blogging: when it first started, it was clearly just going to be an outlet for wannabe journalists, and geeks with nothing better to do with their time. Except that’s not quite how it turned out. Blogs have led to book deals and telly programmes. Some now have readerships that some print media would kill for, and influential bloggers are courted by brands to endorse product, much as journalists are.

Twitter, of course, is the latest phenomenon to have some people waxing lyrical and some turning their noses up in disgust, asking what the point is. (Personally, I think the latter are rather missing out: from a brand perspective, it’s a valuable tool in a communications kit. It allows you to see what people are saying about you, and lets you engage directly with them – whether what they’re saying is good, bad or indifferent. I’ll climb down from the soapbox now.)

It might be that, in an indefinite point some time in the future, both these channels fall by the wayside – or, at least, lose some of the influence they currently have. But what Stoll’s piece should remind us is that, whatever the latest trend, we should have open minds.

As PRs, we shouldn’t allow ourselves to become stuck in the routine of what we know, just because it’s what we know. If something works, then let’s keep doing it. If not, then it’s a waste of everyone’s time.

We don’t need to jump onto a bandwagon, just because it’s there (I’m still deeply sceptical about foursquare – in the age of round-the-clock communication, I don’t need people to know my geographical location too). But if there’s a genuine use for a new tool, then we shouldn’t be scared to embrace it. Because I don’t know about you, but in fifteen years, I don’t want to be known as the gal who poo-poo’d the internet.

Bookmark It

But others – that bloggers’ opinions are less valid than journalists’, simply because they’re not journalists – are less so. Of course, there’s the snobbery factor: that because journalists are paid for their writing, it must be worth paying for, therefore it must be better (this I’d dispute – I’ve had some shockingly put-together emails from journalists, whereas some friends’ blogs are screamingly well-written).

Of course, much of the criticism comes from the established media, which isn’t a surprise: all forms of social media are bringing about a sea change in the way we consume our news. Whatever your philosophical opinions on freedom of speech and the democracy of information, print journalists welcoming the advent of blogs and citizen journalists is a bit like cab horses welcoming the motor car.

Yet, when there is content that the established media likes, they apparently aren’t quite so quick to criticise… A couple of cases spring quickly to mind.

The first is that of Flickr user and photographer Peter Zabulis. Peter recently discovered that a photo of his – quite clearly a beautiful photo – had been used by the Independent newspaper without his permission. The ensuing exchange between Peter and an editor at the paper is available to see on Peter’s Flickr site – showing the Independent’s rather adamant stance that they had not breached Peter’s copyright. It took over a week for the Independent to apologise for the incident, and issue Peter with payment for the use of his photo.

And a case from this weekend shows that it’s not just photographers who should be wary about their content ending up in unexpected places.

Irish blogger and air traffic controller Melanie Schregardus has been the topic of much internet chatter this week, after the Irish Mail on Sunday printed a story based largely on a post she’d written on her blog.

In her own words, “The Mail never told me they were writing a piece about my blog. The journalist who wrote it never sent me an email asking me questions about my blog… [A]n article has appeared in a Sunday Newspaper that… gives me opinions that I do not have, and uses words I have never said. It does so to attack my profession, impugn my employers, and portray me as a victim of my friends.”

At best it’s naïve to believe that you can release words into the cyber-ether and expect them to stay private. But, as a blogger myself, I don’t think it’s too much to ask that even if material is in the public domain it should be credited to its creator. And just lifting copy wholesale is nothing more than lazy journalism. In a response, the Mail has argued that it tried to contact Melanie to inform her. However, a quick rootle round the net, and it does appear that the journalist didn’t try very hard to do so.

With the pace of change in the social media sphere overtaking so much else that underpins the ways we’ve been used to doing things, it’s inevitable that the lines between privacy, ownership and copyright should blur – and it’s something that the law will have to work to keep up with.

But in the meantime, bloggers should be aware that their words, whilst their own, may not stay that way; and journalists should consider whether they’d be so quick to lift someone else’s copy if it had previously appeared on the pages of a paper, rather than on the pages of a blog.

Bookmark It