Monday, August 26, 2013

What Katy Perry can teach technology PR writers

Punchy writing includes a seldom-taught ingredient called assonance. Technology PR writers who make themselves aware of this subtlety are more likely to get compliments such as “She makes copy sparkle” and “His copy really sings.”
The usual reasons for compliments like these are shorter and more five-senses-oriented words, sentence lengths that average 16 words, and audience-centric content that surprises or helps with decision-making.
But assonance -- which includes “vowel rhyme” and is greatly helped by parallel structure -- is another reason, though it’s rarely taught.
Katy Perry uses assonance in “Roar,” as do many artists on your favorite pop channel. For example, notice that the highlighted words don’t rhyme but do share the same vowel sound. (This placement of assonance at the end of the sentence is called “vowel rhyme.”)
I used to bite my tongue and hold my breath
Scared to rock the boat and make a mess
So I sat quietly, agreed politely
I guess that I forgot I had a choice
I let you push me past the breaking point

Here’s a similar example you might find on a website:
“…makes our job more enjoyable and your company more profitable.”
First, notice that both sides of the “and” are parallel in structure:
pronoun + noun + adverb + adjective

our/your + jobs/companies + more/more + enjoyable/profitable

Then, notice the vowel sounds. In addition to the “uhl” sound that ends each phrase, notice the many “O” sounds. This is assonance.
The following sentence is not as easy on the ear because the two phrases aren’t parallel or assonant.
“… makes tasks fun and our clients look great.”
noun + adjective (tasks fun – two syllables)
and
pronoun + noun + verb + adjective (our clients look great – five syllables)

The vowels are mixed: A, Uh and Ow, “I,” Eh, oo-uh, Eh.
Even the following sentence might be better (depending on the tone required for the situation) because each phrase at least begins with the same two parts of speech.
“… makes us smile and brings you success.”
verb pronoun verb
and
verb pronoun noun

Still more parallel: “… puts smiles on our faces and dollars in your pocket.” Both sides have these parts of speech in this order: noun, preposition, pronoun, noun.
Notice that “smiles” and “dollars” are both stressed on the first syllable, share an “uhl” sound, and are the first words on each side. (Notice that spelling doesn’t help you; it’s all in the ear.)
Katy Perry also uses parallel structure in “Roar.”
I stood for nothing, so I fell for everything – parallel contrast

Similarly, count the syllables in the second halves of the first two lines of her song, and notice they each start with the same structure: [and] [verb] …
“… and hold my breath.”
“… and make a mess.”

I’ve got more examples of assonance and parallel structure to share with you, if you like. But if you’ve got the gist, this would be a good place to stop reading. My bottom-line advice is: Listen to vowels and aim for parallel structure.
Caveat: Don't get carried away. It's nice if people say your copy really sings, but not if they say it's sing-song-y. ;-)
***
Here’s an example of sounds that are at odds, albeit in a subtle way that an attuned ear can pick up but is otherwise denotatively fine.
“… mistakes activities for results.”
The writer’s goal was to contrast “activities” with “results,” but the vowels in the contrasting words are a bit too dissimilar to go down perfectly smoothly – different number of syllables, different sounds, different stress.
Activity versus results
 [xxx]-ih-ih-ee versus [xx]-uhl-[tz]
They fight each other. The sounds “ih” and “ee” don’t go well with “uh.”
Notice the following sentence is a bit better, even though it’s not perfectly parallel and doesn’t have really fabulous assonance.
“… change your business outcomes, not just raise your profile”
In poetry (not our goal in tech PR), vowels help create the mood, and the “ee” and “ih” sounds often help create a harsh mood.
"If I bleat when I speak it's because I just got . . . fleeced"
                    "Deadwood" by Al Swearengen

"Strips of tinfoil winking like people"
"The Bee Meeting" by Sylvia Plath

“Without me, without me, without me-ee-ee-ee-ee”
 “I Knew You Were Trouble” by Taylor Swift

You don’t necessarily need assonance. I don’t recommend that you aim for it every time you write a sentence. But raising your awareness may help you begin adding secret sauce to your writing.
Personally, I don’t strive for it, either. But I noticed recently that it serendipitously appears and sounds pretty good. Clients of mine seem to notice that something nice is going on, but they can’t put their finger on exactly what.
Even if you choose not to pursue assonance, I recommend you aim for parallel structure, especially in lists at the ends of sentences. For example:
“… tames chaos, speeds results and builds relationships.” 3x (verb + noun)
is better than
“… gives you faster results, tames chaos and fosters better relationships.” (verb, pronoun, adjective, noun; verb, noun; and verb, adjective, noun)
Or, at a minimum, consider moving the most non-parallel item to the end:

“… gives you faster results, fosters better relationships, and catches mistakes.”

Friday, August 23, 2013

How to approach a dreaded writing project

Here's an excerpt from a note I recently sent to a colleague of a colleague who asked for writing advice. 

She was working in a field I normally don't help with and on a document type that's also outside my expertise. I free-associated a response that I thought might help her. 

The essence of her question was: "How can I get started on a big writing project that intimidates me? I have a lot of knowledge, but I don't know how to channel my efforts. I feel lost."

Top three tips

1. Look for "turning points" in the content in front of you. Comb though your initial "brain dump" and look for new decisions, rejected options, shifts in perspective, forks in the road, or the place in your story where you didn't know what would happen next (or still don't know). Usually, that's where you'll find insights rather than a mere sequence of facts or observations. Pay the most attention to content at this point in your chronology, and dig deeper for more detail, facts and understanding of what's at stake and why it matters. Answer these questions: "Why did it matter?" and "How did I know that was true?"

2. Look for obstacles overcome and lessons learned. Show the journey from Point A to Point B, but not in chronological order. Start with the lesson learned or outcome achieved, and contrast it with the obstacles overcome, all in the same paragraph or -- when possible -- in the same sentence.

3. Make the first three words in each paragraph the most "to the point" or the most 'visual, memorable, active ..." The first three to five words are where skimmers' eyes will fall, and you may be able to lure them in and glue their eyes to the page if you deliver something good from the get-go. 

About process

4. Be messy. Dump your thoughts in a sloppy pile onto the page. Don't "write well." Just dump. Fragments. Ramblings. Lists. Brainstorm questions "the audience" might be asking themselves. Don't judge. Don't fix. Allow typos. Allow wrong vocabulary and tone. The first step is to generate what I delicately spell in make-believe French as "crappe." Write crap. Let it stay crap. Don't worry --- yet. 

5. Step back from your brain-dump. Make a hard copy and add circles, arrows and notes in the margin as you begin to discern some order in the chaos. Then determine a structure -- as in three main points that back up your central premise. 

6. Then look for holes, gaps, things you *wish* you knew. Reflect. Go get more info. Add. 

7. Draft. Now and only now begin to smooth over your sentences and "write well." This is where you fix the typo and search for the most precise word. Then, after a break, delete words and shorten sentences. 

8. For an ending, look at your beginning. Come full circle by picking up something from the start and repurposing it for use at the end. But spend time making it short, visual, emotional, catchy -- good stuff like that. Journalists use the term "kicker." In a great feature article that is likely to be read to the end, they sometimes use their second-best quotation as an ending. Something resonant and memorable that feels good to the ear. Notice, this is not like a conclusion in an essay; instead, move your conclusion to the intro ("get to the point fast") and let your ending instead be very sensory.

The big picture

9. Help others. I always advise looking at an organization's own long-term aspirations. Where does your organization want to be in the future, like in three to five years? How can you help it get there? I would keep those things in mind while doing the brain dump, and look for details and themes that dovetail with the organization's overarching goals.

10. Read current events. Spend time developing your own thoughts about data and current events in your field. Read a lot of articles and notice your response. Look for trends, contrasts and surprises. Repeat the arrows-and-circles process, paying most attention to insights that pop out, not necessarily the facts you gather.

Deepen, then forget. Those last two -- No. 9 and No. 10 -- can help you deepen your content. But don't dwell on your findings overly much so that you're writing *about* them. Just let them prime you, ready you, inspire you, coax you into exploring your own thoughts. Then "forget" about all of that and refocus on the question you've been asked.

Tuesday, July 9, 2013

Psst, this is for you, graduates of my workshops

If you’ve taken my classes or had one-on-one sessions with me at your office, you’ve probably heard me talk about “the best use of best real estate” and “the kicker.”
Here’s a fantastic example in action, courtesy of the Wall Street Journal, still my favorite icon of clear, relevant, audience-centric writing after 25 years of almost daily reading.
My detailed notes are below, starting with the words "two things."

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324867904578592180482641220.html 
July 7, 2013 
Why the San Francisco Plane Crash Wasn't More Deadly
Quick-Thinking Heroics, Air-Safety Gains Kept Death Toll Low 
By REBECCA SMITH, JON OSTROWER, ANDY PASZTOR
Two things:
1. Best real estate
Notice that you can read just the first six words of each paragraph – which I’ve listed for you just below -- and know what the story is about. 

You can also skim this article productively based on the “sign posts” that let you skip directly to details about, for example, how regulatory changes helped save lives, how the captain reacted, or how this crash compares with others in recent history – or whatever else you want to find.
If you take it down to just the first three words, most of the “fast starts” still meet the criteria I’ve given you in my class called “Creating Compelling Content.”
Here’s the list of the first six words of each paragraph. Below that you’ll find my observations about “the kicker.”

1.     A diminutive flight attendant carried injured …
2.     Such quick-thinking heroics in the …
3.     The crash left pieces of the …
4.     The crash occurred with little warning …
5.     "We hit hard and bounced up. …
6.     Mr. Rah noticed that an evacuation …
7.     The captain soon started screaming on …
8.     "She was a hero," he said. …
9.     Meanwhile, San Francisco police officers at …
10.  Aviation-safety experts said the human …
11.  The Asiana crash "is the culmination …
12.  Regulators in the late 1980s mandated …
13.  Before the advent of such stronger …
14.  Mr. Hiatt also said improved fire-…
15.  Enhanced crew training also has made …
16.  Other factors helped limit the toll …
17.  Other high-profile crashes in recent …
18.  In San Francisco, "everyone was fortunate …
19.  "I'm just grateful I survived," said …

2. The kicker
The first person we hear from in the story is Eugene Anthony Rah, an eyewitness of people’s reactions during the crash.
He is also the last person we hear from. And that’s my point.

"The kicker" is a resonant last line in a story that circles back to the top of the story. The kicker is usually emotional, visual, catchy, repeatable, parallel in structure or involving a sharply juxtaposed contrast – usually one or more of these.
This WSJ story comes full circle by reaching back to Mr. Rah for its ending. 

Journalists sometimes debate whether their best quote for a long feature article should be the first quote or the last quote.
First human voice in the story:
The crash occurred with little warning for passengers. Eugene Anthony Rah, a frequent flier on Asiana who was sitting in business class, said he noticed the plane was approaching too low over San Francisco Bay, then he heard an engine noise that made him think the pilot was trying to gain elevation.
"We hit hard and bounced up. People were screaming," he recalled. The plane seemed to careen out of control, skidding sideways, before stopping. Then there was "total silence," he said.
Last paragraph in the story:
"I'm just grateful I survived," said Mr. Rah, the passenger. "I was 99.9% sure I was going to die. I was hoping for a 0.1% miracle, and I got it."
In PR, your contributed article doesn’t need to end in a quote, but the advice is the same: Reach to the top of your story for a main point, make it image-rich or otherwise punchy and memorable, and let that be the ending for your article.
Four more (quick) things:
Sentence length: The sentences in the quotations are five or fewer words in most cases. The longest is 11 words. The longest full quotation (the kicker, in this case) is just 25 words in total, taking up less than two lines across the page.
Contrast that with most press releases, Quotes are usually 80 words long, and each sentence alone often takes up two lines across the page.
Why: The central premise of the story answers the question “why,” which you’ve heard me say is the most important question of all questions (why, why it matters, why care, why now, so what) -- certainly leaps and bounds more important than who, what, where, when and how.
Starts in the middle: The first line is a hook (see just below) that meets almost all of the criteria in the Compelling Content class. It starts in the middle of the action, not with the chronological beginning, an introduction or background.

In the first three words, bam! You are already smack-dab in the heart of the story before you’ve even finished reading the first line across the page.
“Nut graf”: The second paragraph wraps everything up in a nut shell and answers the question: “Why read this story and why read it now?” 

You could stop after the second graf, walk away without finishing, accurately know the gist and purpose of the article, and be well enough informed to join the conversation when the topic comes up during your lunch break.
A diminutive flight attendant carried injured passengers piggyback to safety while two passengers worked to free another flight attendant pinned by an inflated emergency slide, all racing to escape Asiana Airlines Flight 214 minutes before it burst into flames.
Such quick-thinking heroics in the minutes after the plane's spectacular crash at San Francisco International Airport, combined with technological enhancements in recent years that have made jetliner accidents more survivable, likely prevented Saturday's disaster from being far more deadly, experts said.
The full article is below for your convenience. Or click on this link to read it at WSJ.
****

July 7, 2013

Why the San Francisco Plane Crash Wasn't More Deadly

Quick-Thinking Heroics, Air-Safety Gains Kept Death Toll Low


By REBECCA SMITH, JON OSTROWER, ANDY PASZTOR

A diminutive flight attendant carried injured passengers piggyback to safety while two passengers worked to free another flight attendant pinned by an inflated emergency slide, all racing to escape Asiana Airlines Flight 214 minutes before it burst into flames.
Such quick-thinking heroics in the minutes after the plane's spectacular crash at San Francisco International Airport, combined with technological enhancements in recent years that have made jetliner accidents more survivable, likely prevented Saturday's disaster from being far more deadly, experts said.
Broken Landing
The crash left pieces of the BoeingBA +0.23% 777 strewn about the airfield and triggered a fire that burned away much of the plane's roof. Of the 307 passengers and crew aboard the flight from Seoul, two died, both 16-year-old girls from among a Chinese group of students and teachers headed to the U.S. for precollege exchange programs. More than 180 others were taken to hospitals with injuries. Two local hospitals listed 30 people still admitted as of Sunday afternoon, eight of which were in critical condition and two paralyzed.
The crash occurred with little warning for passengers. Eugene Anthony Rah, a frequent flier on Asiana who was sitting in business class, said he noticed the plane was approaching too low over San Francisco Bay, then he heard an engine noise that made him think the pilot was trying to gain elevation.
"We hit hard and bounced up. People were screaming," he recalled. The plane seemed to careen out of control, skidding sideways, before stopping. Then there was "total silence," he said.
Mr. Rah noticed that an evacuation slide had inflated inside the plane, pinning a flight attendant against the interior cabin wall. He and another passenger tried to free the attendant, looking for something sharp with which to puncture the slide. Another passenger eventually found a way to let the air out of the slide. Mr. Rah said he has been in touch with the flight attendant's husband, who said she sustained serious injuries but is improving.
The captain soon started screaming on the loudspeaker for everyone to evacuate. As other passengers began exiting the plane and emergency crews arrived, Mr. Rah saw another flight attendant, whose name he gave as Jiyeon Kim, carrying injured passengers down the aisle to get them off the plane.
"She was a hero," he said. "This tiny, little girl was carrying people piggyback, running everywhere, with tears running down her face. She was crying, but she was still so calm and helping people."
Meanwhile, San Francisco police officers at the scene had entered the plane from near the back and made their way to the front, amid worsening smoke, said Lyn Tomioka, deputy chief at the San Francisco Police Department. When they got to the front, male crew members trying to help passengers called out for knives, and the officers tossed their own knives to the men to help them cut seat belts off passengers who were struggling to get out, Ms. Tomioka said.
Aviation-safety experts said the human toll of the crash was almost certainly reduced by efforts of jet makers, airlines and regulators to reduce the deadliness of air accidents—from the use of flame-retardant materials and new seats designed to withstand tremendous force, to changes in areas such as crew training.
The Asiana crash "is the culmination of what has been done over more than 20 years to help more and more passengers survive crashes," according to Kevin Hiatt, president and chief executive of the Flight Safety Foundation, a nonprofit group in Alexandria, Va., that advocates for safety improvements world-wide.
Regulators in the late 1980s mandated all-new passenger planes must have seats able to withstand stronger impacts than in the past—practices that the Federal Aviation Administration ordered in 2005 be applied to nearly all passenger planes by October 2009. As part of those rules, seats on jetliners must be able in tests to survive collisions that slam them forward at 16 times the force of gravity, or 16g, to ensure the seats don't collapse or detach from the floor. A Boeing spokesman said the company has been delivering all its jets with 16g-rated seats since 2009.
Before the advent of such stronger seats, Mr. Hiatt said, the intense vertical and horizontal force generated by a crash like Saturday's "would have caused many more seats to break free and pancake into each other, probably blocking exit paths."
Mr. Hiatt also said improved fire-resistant materials used on seats and other parts of the cabin "likely helped the fire from intensifying so quickly."
Enhanced crew training also has made a significant difference. Cabin crews train to evacuate passengers in chaotic and unpredictable circumstances, including being unsure which exits are safe to use. Airplanes are designed to be evacuated in just 90 seconds, even when half the doors and escape slides are inoperative or unavailable.
Other factors helped limit the toll of Saturday's accident. Because the plane was landing, its speed was relatively slow, reducing the force with which it crashed. Rescue crews used cutting-edge nozzles, equipped with cameras, attached to the end of hoses. Firefighters were able to maneuver those nozzles directly inside the cabin and aim the spray at the most dangerous hot spots. In addition, some crews had equipment able to pierce the plane's aluminum fuselage to gain better access to the fire.
Other high-profile crashes in recent years have also seen many passengers escape alive. Everyone survived a 2008 Continental Airlines flight that veered off a Denver runway in high winds, splitting the body of the jet in two. Two passengers died in August 2010 when an Aires Boeing 737 landed short in bad weather at a Caribbean island, also splitting the passenger cabin into pieces. In April, a newly delivered Lion Air Boeing 737 crashed in poor visibility short of a runway in Bali, Indonesia; all 108 people aboard survived.
In San Francisco, "everyone was fortunate that the fire didn't start immediately, so it gave passengers time to scramble out of the plane," said Michael Barr, who teaches air-safety courses at the University of Southern California.
"I'm just grateful I survived," said Mr. Rah, the passenger. "I was 99.9% sure I was going to die. I was hoping for a 0.1% miracle, and I got it."
—Vauhini Vara, Daniel Michaels, Ben Kesling and William Harless contributed to this article.
Write to Rebecca Smith at rebecca.smith@wsj.com, Jon Ostrower atjon.ostrower@wsj.com and Andy Pasztor at andy.pasztor@wsj.com

A version of this article appeared July 8, 2013, on page A6 in the U.S. edition of The Wall Street Journal, with the headline: Heroics and Air-Safety Gains Kept Toll Low.

Sunday, June 16, 2013

How to use a trademark symbol in a press release

If your client is asking for guidance on the use of the trademark symbol in a press release, you are in a gray area where there's no definitive answer. 

The compromise that I like is the one recommended in this blog by Pete Codella, a PR consultant from Salt Lake City whose post I happened upon during an open-ended Google search. 

Pete cites this passage from the International Trademark Association

"The ™, SM or ® symbol need only appear in the first or most prominent mention of the mark. Omission of the ™, SM or ® symbol does not invalidate or compromise a trademark owner’s rights in a trademark. Its purpose is to alert the public to the ownership of the mark, and it is one of the primary ways to affirmatively protect a mark."

In my reading of this guidance, the important part is "or most prominent mention," which is open to interpretation. Is the most prominent mention the headline? Or should the symbol wait for the body of the release where details are explained? You get to choose. There's no rule. Personally, I like headlines that are short and clutter-free, so I'd refrain from using the symbol there, but that's just my personal preference. 

Note that you don't need the symbol at all, anywhere: 

"Omission ... does not invalidate ... rights," says the ITA.

Does the trademark symbol interfere with SEO? In an open-ended Google search, I couldn't find any evidence that it does, and I found a lot of anecdotal evidence that it doesn't.

I encourage you to read the rest of Pete's 2009 post, which includes his informal survey of PR pros via Twitter, a conversation he had with a lawyer and what the AP Stylebook says, as well as the ITA citation above.

From personal experience as a reporter with The Associated Press, I know that in AP style (the PR industry's adopted style), you capitalize a trademarked name without a TM, SM or R symbol. For example, if the word "Kleenex" was used to mean "facial tissue" in a quote, it would be capitalized, even if the speaker wasn't talking about a Kleenex brand tissue. 

Likewise, you Google something (with a capital G) even though you aren't talking about the company but the act of searching. In some parts of the country, people say Coke instead of soda or pop, and the term is capitalized because it's trademarked, even if they are referring to generic soda. 

Those two iconic brands -- Kleenex and Coke -- don't use TM or R symbols in their press releases, by the way. I just checked a variety of releases on Business Wire and PR Newswire. However, you will find the R symbol on commercial websites that sell Kleenex and Coke.

Here's what the U.S. Trademark and Patent Office's website says about the benefits of having a registered trademark. It doesn't say how or when to use the symbols, just that they "put people on notice" that you are claiming rights.

"What are the benefits of federal trademark registration?

Owning a federal trademark registration on the Principal Register provides several advantages, including:
  • Public notice of your claim of ownership of the mark;
  • A legal presumption of your ownership of the mark and your exclusive right to use the mark nationwide on or in connection with the goods/services listed in the registration;
  • The ability to bring an action concerning the mark in federal court;
  • The use of the U.S. registration as a basis to obtain registration in foreign countries;
  • The ability to record the U.S. registration with the U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) Service to prevent importation of infringing foreign goods;
  • The right to use the federal registration symbol ®; and
  • Listing in the United States Patent and Trademark Office’s online databases."
Speaking for myself only, I can add another thought related to the nuanced difference between marketing and PR. It borders on the philosophical, so most of you will want to stop reading here.

***

The delineation between marketing communications and PR is debatable. 

But I think of PR as an effort to generate third-party conversation among people who filter information through their own lenses, thereby lending credibility to information in a way that advertising and brochures cannot. 

Credibility comes from the fact that these third parties don't stand to profit or otherwise benefit from an endorsement. No vested interest. I think people tend to listen with their guards down when listening to third parties, whereas they may be more guarded with a speaker who stands to profit from the outcome.

In marketing communications (ads, brochures, company Twitter streams, etc.), it's known that the profiting party is also the source of the information, so "buyer beware." Do I expect a company to volunteer information about a product feature it doesn't offer? No. Brag about bad customer service? No. Reveal hefty repair costs? No.

A TM symbol, in my mind, is the mark of a profiting party. Journalist don't use it. Friends writing to friends don't use it. Only a company with a legal interest in protecting turf uses it. 

So you might leave it out of communications where you are encouraging a guards-down conversation.

Press releases fall into the category of marketing communications, not PR, even though it's usually the PR team that drafts and circulates them. A press release goes directly from the company to the public, without first being filtered by a third party. It's like an ad, brochure or company Twitter stream, so "buyer beware." 

If I see a TM symbol, my "buyer beware" warning light comes on, even if it was previously off.

My question is this: If a company wants to use a press release to build its relationships with customers and prospective customers, is there any benefit to including the TM symbol? Readers don't find it elucidating or comforting; rather, it may be an annoyance or serve to remind them of the company's self-interest -- guards up!

However, if the press release is meant to be a formal stake in the ground, designating legal territory and excluding competitors, I see the benefit to including a TM symbol. It puts people on notice, as the ITA says. In this case, the primary audience would appear to be competitors and channel or retail partners, not customers.

If the decision were mine, I'd leave trademark symbols out of press releases. But I'm a former journalist, and my opinion may not be representative of the general public's. Maybe people regard the symbol as a mark of authority that boosts their faith in the product -- I don't know. 

Either way, I'm comfortable with the ITA's "first or most prominent mention" compromise.