A little over 22 years ago, I backed into business ownership by starting a PR agency that I’d call, creatively enough, Hodge Communications.

I’d never had any intention of owning a business. I hadn’t really thought I’d ever get out of journalism, where I’d done quite well for myself. And PR? Well, I didn’t consider it the dark side even though I had my share of horror stories of truly idiotic practitioners. But that didn’t necessarily mean I wanted to do it for a living.

Circumstances, however, said different. My final editorial job was as business editor of the Chicago Sun-Times in a post- (Rupert) Murdochian era, where to look at someone cross-eyed could get you fired in a flash. I’m quite skilled at the cross-eyed thing, which didn’t keep me from being able to read the handwriting on the wall after the market crash of 1987. Our team did a bang-up job of coverage, but I failed to hide my exasperation at an editor whose sole interest in the crash and our coverage was how the Magellan Fund was doing. Less than three months later, I was gone. A source asked if I wanted to do PR for his firm. I said only if I could do it as an independent. And the shingle was hung.

Fast forward to 2010, and we all know that the crash of ’87 had nothing on what’s transpired over the last two years. I think it’s been particularly hard on the smaller businesses like mine. Cash flow can be a crippler. Competition is intense. You can cut back on the mouths that must be fed, but not at the risk of jeopardizing client work.

And so I tired of the battle, and decided to take a major step. Call it downsizing. Or rightsizing (now there’s an annoying term). I’m closing Hodge Communications and Hodge Schindler, its sole operating unit, and starting a new business in its stead – Hodge Media Strategies, Inc. My “name” partner, Judi Schindler, is reviving Schindler Communications, with whom I merged in 2007.

For me, it’s kind of a “back to the future” move. Just like in the beginning, I’ll have a computer, a phone, and an office in my home. I’ll still have a team of people – though mainly “virtual” – that I can count on to help get the work done. I’ll have more time to do what I love – tell people what to do and write (not necessarily in that order). It will give me more financial flexibility to take on work – interesting startups, for example – that maybe I’d previously have turned away for lack of budget.

In the next few weeks, I’ll be redirecting Facebook “friends” of Hodge Schindler to a new page for Hodge Media Strategies to see if it’s something they might “like.” I’ll likely be starting a new blog, definitely a new website, and am also thinking about a new newsletter concept. Hmmm. Gotta update that LinkedIn profile, as well.

Change is good. And it’s back to the future we go!

While there’s no doubt the economic challenges that businesses continue to face are helping the fortunes of some PR agencies, the evolving nature of the communications industry dictates that agencies must adapt their offerings to promote future growth.

With the disappearance of expansive advertising and marketing budgets at large and small companies alike, turning to more cost-effective public relations strategies made immediate sense for many over the last two years. But for the mutual success of clients and agencies to continue, there must be shared recognition of some essential truths in the near term. Here, then, are just three factors that are likely to affect the PR industry throughout 2011:

Specialization’s the differentiator. The days of simply providing press release distribution and media relations services are long gone. Clients today want an extra edge, honed by more strategic thinking and more cost-effective tactics. Agencies must continue to sharpen their skills using Web-based initiatives, social media strategies, media relationship-building programs and other approaches that demonstrate to clients that all the stops are being pulled to achieve the goal of exposing the client to targeted audiences. Agencies still offering 1980s-style PR services will be able to find clients, but ultimately will be left behind when savvy CMOs realize that firms that resist learning new tricks shouldn’t get the gig.

For example, a client that insists that a single story in a regional business publication will turn its fortunes around is setting up the agency for failure and itself for disappointment. Without utilizing other channels (Web distribution, marketing leave-behinds, etc.) that support the coverage, the audience will forget about the company and its story soon after its appearance – if it’s even been noticed to begin with. Agencies that can integrate these supporting tactics – for a reasonable cost – will earn the loyalty and respect of the client and open the door for more extensive work.

Continuing education’s key. It’s tough anytime for agencies to explain exactly what PR can do for clients given the vast scope of the possibilities. Clients are expecting much more from agencies – as they probably should – and that includes bringing them up to speed as to why and how specific strategies will help achieve their goals before any contracts are signed. Even if the client grasps the basics of PR, new paradigms are being established through innovation on both sides of the relationship.

Several years ago, a consumer services provider contracted with us to develop a PR-based program to help convert its customers into ambassadors to help grow the business without spending more dollars on advertising. Unfortunately, the client’s managers couldn’t wrap their heads around the concept that coverage of a unique solution to a business problem builds image and awareness, but it’s difficult to draw a direct correlation to added revenue as advertising does. Make sure everyone comprehends what the program will achieve at the outset, and help the client understand why a blog might have drawbacks, but a Facebook campaign might be effective.

Sometimes the client doesn’t “know” what it doesn’t know. PR firms – like all service providers – are partly required to bring creative thinking to the party. But what may seem an obvious solution to a client’s business problem may not be as apparent to a client that’s unfamiliar with the tools and tactics today’s PR and marketing firms can bring to the table. For instance, a client may not know that it’s possible to develop a relationship with a reporter or editor at a specific publication or broadcast show who covers the client’s industry and reaches an audience that the client wants or needs to reach. Making the client aware of how to do this will further differentiate the agency from the competition when it comes time to renew or extend the contract with the client.

As for clients with previous agency experience, remember that just because that predecessor agency didn’t employ a specific tactic during its tenure doesn’t necessarily mean that all agencies operate the same. One of our clients had a five-year relationship with an agency that required the client to write its own press releases. When we signed on and explained that it’s our job to write and then manage the release’s distribution, it was like an arc light turning on inside of a darkened room. Again, providing alternatives to what the client has grown used to often goes a long way toward cementing a successful relationship.

With general economic uncertainty destined to continue into 2011, it’s more important than ever for PR agencies to become proactive in opening doors for opportunity by attracting clients who may not know that they need these services. By recommitting to a structured, customized approach for new prospects, PR agencies will be able to not only weather this economic storm but also thrive in an environment where companies seemingly are more open to giving PR strategies a try.

By Sally Saville Hodge

The client was happy. Very happy. He’d just hired an SEO expert to help boost the search profile of his Web-based business.

“Yeah, the guy’s going to do a blog for us. He’s going to get us in all the directories. He signed us up for a service called INeedHits.com. And he’s doing it really cheap!”

The red flags were being hoisted with the word “blog” and reached the top of the pole when we got to “cheap.” It wasn’t an issue that we were the “experts” (because we’re not) and I was being territorial. It was more that these activities were a) not very strategic; b) time consuming (if done right); and c) more appropriate for a broad-based e-commerce concern than a Web-based business with a very narrow audience.

I’m not sure if it all was being undertaken to boost traffic or to improve search rankings or both. I didn’t think the client understood SEO. I wasn’t sure the “expert” did, either – at least according to my understanding of it.

As Mark O’Brien, president of Newfangled, a Web development firm, says, “There is no element of Web strategy that is more replete with misinformation than SEO. SEO is actually quite basic, but a lot of SEO professionals make it more
complicated than it needs to be to stay in business.”

The goal of an effective SEO program is less one of driving visitors to a website, and more one of creating traffic that actually converts, whether into actual business or as a contact that has given you “permission” to reach out regularly (via newsletters, special offers, etc.).

And these days, that’s tied to two things, according to Ryan Evans, whose Rand Media Group specializes in SEO and Web marketing activities. “One is the content on the page. The second is the number of links to that page. So if you’re not generating content that’s generating interest from relevant websites, then you’re not doing SEO.”

The thing is that Google is smart. “It’s searching for the best content to match the search query,” explains Evans. “It’s all about making the search experience excellent. If your SEO program doesn’t contribute to that, then it’s not working.”

A quick look at the specific strategies that the client was so excited about:

• Blogs. Yes, blogs are a great SEO tool, but only if “they contain original content based on your expertise, what you know, and what your clients and prospects care about,” says O’Brien. In this instance, the blog was aggregating content – credited reposts from experts in aligned fields. Google understands and only indexes the original source of the content. So an aggregator blog is not likely to boost search rankings or meaningful traffic.

• Directories. “Getting listed on 10,000 directories was an SEO strategy a few years ago, but it really doesn’t do any good,” says Evans. It goes back to the content issue, and is an obvious ploy that Google recognizes as such. A further concern is relevance – if visitors do click through from all those directories, will they convert or bounce?

• “Hit” sites. “Ineedhits.com? How about Ineedabrain.com?” O’Brien queries a tad sarcastically. “For most websites, unless they’re making money off ad revenue, visitor count is meaningless if it’s not the right sort of visitor. You measure efficacy not by traffic, but by how you engage visitors once they get on your site.”

As in any business, there are SEO practitioners who don’t stay on top of changing best practices and cling to tactics that worked five years ago, but not so well today. Neither they nor many clients understand that, especially in a highly fragmented media world, effective SEO can’t be done in a silo. It requires forging partnerships with PR and marketing experts who can ensure strategies and tactics are in service to the brand.

In this client’s case, Google Analytics showed exactly how well this SEO strategy wasn’t working. Traffic shot up enormously, but in keeping with the scattershot approach, so did the bounce rate (the number of visitors who clicked through and departed the site immediately because it was irrelevant to their needs). The bounce rate actually jumped from a respectable 30 percent to over 80 percent. At that pace, it’s doubtful that many conversions took place – not that I’m convinced that was a goal to begin with.

Our business is very consultative. We can’t be experts in everything, but we make it our business to learn and stay on top of best practices in fields that are aligned to what we do. That way, we know enough to ask the right questions and to try to guide our clients in their thinking and decisions. When you can’t get together on expectations, though, that’s when you part company, as we did with this client, with a Godspeed and good luck.

We’ve thrilled to Isaiah Mustafa’s towel-draped, manly-man physique.

We’ve marveled at the brilliant, single-shot commercial in which his Old Spice washed body strolls from beach to log roll to kitchen, then jumps into a hot tub — only to have it break way, revealing him astride a motorcycle.

And we’re awestruck that the agency Widen + Kennedy in Portland followed up the commercials a week ago by uploading to YouTube nearly 190 videos (by my count) featuring Mustafa sending personal responses to Facebook, Twitter and other social media fan posts. The first 67 videos were shot in a single, grueling 11-hour day.

One of the best ad campaigns of the year, it’s sure to go down in the annals of marketing history not just for its wit and technical virtuosity, but also for the lessons it teaches us about advertising and social marketing.

Repositioning the brand – The Old Spice brand, which had become associated with aging baby boomers, is getting a radical image transplant through a variety of commercials directed at a younger, hipper audience. The Mustafa spots for Matterhorn body wash (aimed at women) are part of a series of spots that use humor to encourage viral Internet spread. Check out the Old Spice Odor Blocker commercials that have created almost as much buzz among post-adolescent males.

Integrating traditional advertising with social media – I have no idea what the original media buy was for the commercials, but the earned exposure in print, broadcast and on-line media generated millions of downloads. When the personalized videos were posted (starting around July 13), the campaign moved into the awareness stratosphere. The videos were addressed to such celebrities as Demi Moore, George Stephanopoulos and Apolo Ohno as well as to lesser folks like jsbeats and 1275JDH. Some of the video responses generated two-way dialogue in real time.

Agency Trust – Social media is not for clients who are faint of heart. Procter & Gamble, which owns Old Spice, could not possibly approve 67 videos produced in one day (at a rate of one per every seven minutes). “What we’ve learned from this is the value of having an incredible client who’s brave enough to let themselves operate at the speed of the Internet,” says Iain Tait, global interactive executive creative director for W+K. “Having the freedom to operate in that way is massive.”

Clever Sells – There is no better way to capture public attention and generate buzz than through witty, ground-breaking creative concepts.

Selling with humor certainly isn’t anything new. One classic: The original U.S. print ads for Volkswagen featuring lots of white space, a tiny photo of the car and only two words: “Think Small.” The first Energizer bunny commercials were literally show stoppers – interrupting fake commercials with the bunny “still going, going . . .” This was advertising that people talked about.

Today, the difference is the Internet, which enables the conversation to move at warp speed around the globe, growing its audience exponentially as it travels.

So hats off to Old Spice, its agency and Isaiah Mustafa. You nailed it. You leveraged your message across a variety of platforms. And you raised the bar for everyone else.

As magazine publishers race to remain relevant to readers and advertisers alike, the jury is still out as to whether the various forays into digital-only waters will prove to be the salvation these publishers seek.

It’s only been nine months since Conde Nast abruptly shut down Gourmet magazine. And now the magazine publishing giant unveiled a slate of apps that revived that brand, among other titles, in pure digital form. The Gourmet Live app, first announced in June 2010, gives users access to the magazine’s voluminous database of articles, but also offers interactive opportunities to access new content, buy premium app-only content and incorporate social sharing technology. Gourmet Live will debut sometime in the fourth quarter, about one year after Conde Nast launched an app for its GQ men’s magazine to go along with its fee-based WIRED magazine app for the iPad, which launched in June.

Meanwhile, print titles are dipping a toe deeper into the digital pool. New York-based website developer and design specialist The Wonder Factory teamed up with Google and Time Inc.’s Sports Illustrated magazine this spring to introduce a prototype digital magazine based on HTML5. (Tech-savvy readers will remember that this is the platform that Steve Jobs claimed makes Adobe Flash obsolete for use in Apple’s line of digital hardware products like the iPhone, iPod Touch and iPad, sparking a war of words with the software developer.) The demo features video that accompanies specific articles and page navigation that should entertain even the most jaded reader of paper-based magazines.

But the real issue here isn’t the technological advances or the “coolness” of these steps being taken by desperate publishers. With the profit paradigm changing nearly every day, the question is “How can these publishing firms make money as readers (and advertisers) abandon printed products?” And although general magazine readership rose eight percent in the last 10 years, circulation of magazines and newspapers continue to decline as whatever readers are left visit the Web for their access to information that used to come solely from print.

So far, The Wall Street Journal is one of the rare newspapers to make any money from its online version of its flagship product thanks to a subscription model that works for its business-focused audience. It will be interesting to see whether The New York Times, which abandoned its TimesSelect subscription service in 2007, will be able to retain the people who currently read its free content when they’re asked to pay for it sometime next year.

Ironically, a recent Times article pointed out that publishers continue to try and learn how to best present their wares online, especially when it comes to creating the viral buzz through social media. Hearst Publishing, in fact has launched a massive social networking push for its Seventeen magazine that aims to attract girls away from Facebook and other online social networks. Hearst hopes to better compete with other online magazines effort by redesigning Seventeen.com to also offer more gossip and celebrity news along with its print features.

So it looks like there’s still a long way to go from the days of “Take a look at this article” by passing the print version it to your spouse or co-worker to “Just Tweet this Time magazine article through its iPad app.” (It can’t currently be done, Time admits.) But the “test-and-learn” approach may be only way for publishers to ultimately figure out how to win the war for reader and advertiser attention in the digital battlefield.

As both Toyota and BP wage war to preserve their brands in the face of colossal crises, my money is on Toyota.

Last November, when the story broke about safety issues and mammoth recalls, the Japanese automaker violated every rule in the crisis management book by foot-dragging on safety issues, minimizing problems, distributing misleading statements and showing too little compassion. As a result, it suffered from stinging articles in the media and became the butt of every talk-show comedian.

Then, sometime in February, Toyota seemed to get its communication act together. President Akio Toyoda appeared before Congress and apologized. The company established “Smart Teams” of 200 engineers to investigate individual issues and appointed nine quality officers worldwide who could answer media questions

It created webcasts to respond to critics regarding gas pedal and electronic system issues and launched a website designed to address the issues. One of the most effective sites features video interviews of Toyota owners who have brought their cars in for recall repairs – all of whom express confidence that “if something is wrong, Toyota will fix it.”

Then there’s BP, whose issues are massive and ongoing. Worst of all, top management at the petroleum company seems to compound one misstep (or misspeak) on top of another.

On the other hand, BP hasn’t done everything wrong. The company has a well-executed  website, which includes videos, photos and press releases on the cleanup, where you hear first-hand from the individuals who are out in the Gulf every day working to contain the damage. (One video features actor Kevin  Costner praising BP’s efforts.) There are also state-by-state updates, claims forms and information on how to file a claim.

Both the BP and Toyota websites get high marks. But let’s assess the damage to the two brands.

There is no question that the carmaker’s consumer loyalty has slipped, but in the first quarter of 2010, 57.6% of trade-ins resulted in purchase of new Toyota – higher than any other brand. Sales have also recovered, up 24.4% in April, and in May the company reported net profits were 48% higher than the same period in 2009.

The public is not quite so forgiving of BP, especially since the crisis situation has yet to be abated. On June 21, several dozen demonstrations took place in cities across the country as part of the “Worldwide BP Protest Day,” a Facebook group that claims to have more than 350,000 supporters. Four days later, on June 25, the company’s stock hit an all-time low of $28.56 low, down nearly 53% since April 20.

So what’s the prognosis? In my opinion, the general public is more favorably disposed to Toyota than to BP. Toyota has a long history of building reliable automobiles and providing good service. It has happy car owners. Energy companies, like BP, do not enjoy the same favorable image. While BP had a better reputation than most oil companies, the entire industry has a reputation for price gouging and air pollution.

Toyota simply has a larger storehouse of goodwill, and, frankly, we are more willing to forgive someone we like.

The moral of the story is that crisis management must begin long before a crisis ever occurs – by building a reputation for dealing responsibly with the consumers, by behaving like a good corporate citizen, by providing reliable products and services and by communicating openly and candidly with its many publics. In other words, a company that nurtures and maintains good public relations over a period of years will have a better chance of surviving a crisis than one that doesn’t.

“I love social media. I think it has great potential. But I can’t figure out how we can make money off it.”

With those words our client gave voice to the $64,000 question that gets debated with increasing frequency in communications circles. How do you measure social media ROI? It ranks right up there with PR (did someone mention “ad value equivalency”?) as an issue that has no truly satisfactory solutions.

Many clients, including some of ours, want to see a direct correlation between social media initiatives and cash registers ringing (or the equivalent thereof). The reality, of course, is that marketing or PR, whoever owns social media in your organization, typically doesn’t have control over many of the factors that will close the sale.

In other words, we can heighten awareness through social media strategies. We can get you friends and followers by designing engaging initiatives. We can drive traffic to your site through smartly conceived e-newletters and e-marketing initiatives or press releases distributed over wire or well-placed articles in the traditional or digital media.

But we can’t close the sale, and if you’re not able to deliver operationally, then it’s all for naught.

Blogger Steve Goldner made these points in a post last year, and like others opining on the topic of social media ROI, has suggested some parameters to help you weigh whether your efforts are paying off. Among them: number of friends and followers, the amount of discussions being generated (including written, video and photo comments), number of retweets and number of downloads.

All are well and good, but I suspect such measures are likely to leave the financial guys less than impressed.

The reality is that setting up a systematic process to get at ROI – whether it’s for social media, PR or marketing – is hard work. Take a look at this great slideshow that lays out, in a very amusing way, what it takes to get at meaningful measures that tell you over time just how successful your social media initiatives are.

Bigger businesses may be willing, and they have the wherewithal, to make that kind of investment. Smaller businesses, however, don’t typically have the internal resources to do it themselves. And they’d rather pay us to develop the ideas and help execute. Not to measure.

It’s a conundrum, all right. The solution may lie in a combination of efforts, particularly among smaller businesses: Demonstrating growth in awareness (e.g. increased friends/followers, etc.) and using website analytics to track growth in visitors, downloads and other key measures.

It may not directly address the “show me the money” question, but is more substantive than the “you’ll know success when you see it” gauge that we’ve seen too many businesses settle for.

I wish I had a nickel for every eye-roll I’ve encountered when mentioning Twitter as a social media channel.

I wish I had a dime for every person who’s ever told me they thought Twitter was stupid, without trying it first to get the context.

I wish I had a quarter for everyone who’s ever asked me what they’d Tweet about anyway, and how can anyone possibly write about anything meaningfully in 140 characters or less.

Well, no one’s getting rich off Twitter yet – least of all me. Even though an increasing number of businesses are apparently using it as a tool to build their images and contribute over the long haul to their revenue streams. Think Dell. Or Zappos. Or even small businesses without the big guys’ resources, like the coffeeshop CoffeeGroundz.

But one interesting way to look at Twitter goes beyond dollars and cents and considers its contribution to our culture as spawning a creative new literary form. Time magazine columnist James Poniewozik writes about it, and makes some relevant comparisons to how writers have, through the ages, “shaped their work to exploit technology.”

Now, there’s “Twitterature” that goes well beyond the Tweets and re-Tweets of celebrity doings, endless links to this or that article, and mindless meanderings about Average Joe or Jill’s day.

We have humor. Comedian Justin Halpern’s posts as @shitmydadsays have earned him such a following that it has led to a television show, to premier this fall. A recent sample: ”I don’t want your advice, you’re 27 fucking years old…Fine. I don’t want your advice, you’re 29 fucking years old.”

There’s satire. Consider @BPGlobalPR which has gained legions of followers since the disaster on the Gulf Coast. Its biting posts surely are giving BP’s real PR team fits. To wit: “Surprised ourselves by getting emotional on the coast today. Turns out the wind blew dispersant in our eyes.”

And satiric writing resources, even. Anyone who has ever referred to the venerable AP Stylebook for guidance will appreciate @FakeAPStylebook: “Spell it “ellipsis,” “ellipses,” “elipsis,” “ellipseseisis” – no one really knows or cares.”

I’m having trouble with the idea of a sitcom designed around a Twitter feed, no matter how good the posts. And for me, Twitterature will never replace the well-written book, newspaper or magazine or even blog article. But it does the job of providing entertainment in fast, bite-sized morsels. It’s pretty apropos for our lifestyles today.

Plenty of bloggers are out there who have made it a specialty of outing really bad PR practices. Unfortunately, there’s no shortage of fodder to work with.

I’m not about to give Richard Laermer and Kevin Dugan at The Bad Pitch Blog a run for their money, but occasionally, Richard flags an instance of egregiously horrendous behavior that I have to share.

In posting about it on Facebook, he called it “funny.” (And not in a ha-ha way.) I couldn’t watch the clip without cringing and feeling truly embarrassed on this practitioner’s behalf…since clearly he was totally oblivious to the many ways he was crossing the boundaries of professional and just plain interpersonal behaviors.

Clients: Do not mistakenly believe this is the kind of aggressiveness you want in your PR person. It damages not only his brand, but yours.

There’s a reason many of my journalist friends talk about moving into PR as going to the dark side.

Despite being a faithful (if abashed) reader of celebrity publications like People magazine, I somehow missed the hubbub over one of my favorite pseudo celebrities (not): Kim Kardashian.

Kim, of course, is emblematic of a new phenomenon with the American public: The elevation to star status of people who have absolutely no discernible talent or skills, but have been smart enough to hire effective publicists. (See Paris Hilton and Nicole Richie.)

She does have one thing going for her, however. She Twitters. Over 3 million people actually follow her tweets. That apparently gives her some degree of influence over the masses. And so, in a new twist on a time-honored marketing ploy, Kim is now in hot demand as a celebrity endorser via Twitter.

It’s called “sponsored Tweets,” a gentler term than advertising and presumably one that resonates more positively in an environment where authenticity supposedly rules.

Kim is at the top of this particular heap and reportedly rakes in a cool $10,000 per tweet. She’s not the only “publisher” to do so – just for lesser amounts. Dr. Drew is a big draw and so is Lindsay Lohan and her ex, Samantha Ronson. Even business groups with a big following – the CBOE and Stock Futures Forecast – are registered as being available via the leading matchmaking platform, Ad.ly.

The whole business raises a lot of issues relative to transparency and authenticity, the ultimate barometers of successful social media interactions. Ad.ly claims that the endorsed tweets it brokers are identified through the “#advertising” disclaimer at the end of each post.

But a growing number of concerns are entering the fray and may not be so principled. And unfortunately, while the Federal Trade Commission issued guidelines on celebrity (and other) blog endorsements last year, requiring full disclosure, it somehow left the Twitter issue to fall between the cracks.

Ultimately, the $64,000 question is whether a Twitter post by Kim or Dr. Drew or even the CBOE is going to pay off with new business. At least one expert says, “Not so much.” At last month’s Ad Age Digital Media Conference, Yahoo’s principal research scientist Duncan Watts told the audience: “If I had a fixed budget, I could get more value from a small amount of very influential [influencers], or a lot of smaller influencers, on Twitter. If you recruit enough people who, on average, influence just one other person, you could get a much better return on investment if you aggregated them and altogether paid them a tenth of what Kardashian gets.”

I’d settle! And to that end I’ll need to build up my followers. Follow me at @sallyshodge so I can give Kim a run for her money.