The ENTiPping Point

As 8 p.m. Central time rolled around this past week, the President of the United States began his 1-hour and 6 minute long speech to the Congress on the "State of the Union".  Sadly, like many other "State of the Union" addresses, I had trouble collecting excitement to watch it.  It is not because I dislike the current or past Presidents' policies, views or initiatives.  It is because, unfortunately, something that started out as an update to Congress has become a parade of positioning with subsequent counterpointing following shortly thereafter.

As an American citizen, I have trouble watching this political circus and struggle to relate to the grandiose plans that are often unveiled that are intended to relieve debt, create jobs, make us independent of foreign oil and create a sustainable energy plan.  They sound good, but often lack the detail that satisfies my curious personality.  How will that get done?  Where will the money come from?  What are the ramifications if we do that?

So as you can tell, I have difficulty buying into any message that I don't understand or for which I can't find supporting details.  For people like me, the "State of the Union" speech needs to have more meat in it.  And for this reason, I'd like to propose an idea that would get the "State of the Union" on track as the powerful, substantive message to Congress:

Retool the "State of the Union" for the benefit of Congress and the American people.

But to do so, we must first understand one basic concept of the "State of the Union" address:

The President Isn't Talking to Us

Let's back up a moment and revisit the intent of the "State of the Union" address.  Article II, Section 3 of the “Constitution of the United States” states that:

"[the President] shall from time to time give to the Congress information on the State of the Union, and recommend to their Consideration such measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient."

Notice the audience -- Congress.  Nowhere in this Constitutional statement does it say that the State of the Union's audience is the average American voter.

But in 1947, President Truman possibly changed the "State of the Union" address forever by broadcasting the address on TV, exposing thousands of households at the time to what the President was saying to Congress.  The distance of time and press would have previously made the conversation between the President and Congress a seemingly more intimate conversation within the joint session of Congress.  But with the introduction of the TV broadcast of the speech, the American public was invited to take a seat on the floor of the House of Representatives to hear what the President had to say.

But... the President still wasn't speaking to the American public.  And herein lies the mess that this fork in the road has led us to.

When George Washington spoke to his joint session of Congress on January 8th, 1790, he spoke an estimated 4 to 7 minutes.  To the House of Representatives, he directed but a single paragraph.  Following this paragraph, he addressed both the House and Senate.  In those paragraphs, he essentially said, "keep on keepin' on -- you're doing good stuff" and I'm going to have some bills/issues sent your way for consideration.

Before these two paragraphs, he listed the items of priority for them and for us as a country going forward that he felt were important.  It was a vision of where we should be placing importance.  It was not filled with budget numbers and specifics nor did anyone likely expect it to.  It was a way to say "here's what I feel is important in strategy -- let's find a way to work toward this vision".

The Modern-Day "State of the Union" Address

Our expectations of the "State of the Union" address have risen to heights that are, quite frankly, lofty and outrageous.  Because we're privy to a virtual seat on the House floor, we now seem to think that there should be a detailed plan presented in the immediate sentences following any initiative unveiled.  Critics in the media will talk about the "lack of substance" or "lack of details" of Plan XYZ presented.

But what we're failing to remember is that the "State of the Union" speech is not about the voter.  It's about an opportunity for the executive branch of government to address the legislative -- those who represent us.  We're sitting in on a business strategy meeting -- one in which the President can discuss the past year and lay out objectives going forward.  As such, it should also be expected that, while televised and webcasted live, the President should treat his annual address to Congress as though the viewers at home do not exist.  Consider the amount of rhetoric, grandstanding and theatrics that might not take place if cameras were not rolling.  How many stops for applause and standing ovations might be eliminated?  How much of the "State of the Union" is about partisan positioning versus true communication with Congress?

If you have trouble with that last statement, consider that Congress receives a copy of the President's address in advance of the actual speech.  With that fact in mind, is there really even a point in Congress showing up to listen?  It's not the message anymore, but the jockeying for power surrounding the message that has taken center stage.

So, in reality, not only has the "State of the Union" moved away from what was most likely its true intent, but is now a misunderstood moment of Presidential communication whose objective has become cloudy over time.  How can we get it back on track?  How do we find a happy medium whereby Congress is allowed to hear from the President in a setting that more resembles a productive business meeting, yet we as American voters are allowed to hear the President's plans for the country?

We need a form of "State of the Union" for the American people and I'm proposing something new and different that will take effort for both us as voters and for the U.S. Government as a huge, intricate machine.  Our "State of the Union" would be much less like a speech and more like a discussion and explanation of where we came from over the past year and where we need to go.

Let's Envision a "People's Address Initiative".

Idea #1: The People’s Address Should Be a Day Long (at Least)

I have been in staff meetings for groups of 8-10 that can last 3 to 4 hours easily.  We can't expect the President's "State of the Union" address to cover everything about the nation in an address to us in the kind of detail that will leave us fulfilled.  If we're going to complain about the President not giving us substance, then we as voters need to commit some time to understanding what's going on with the finances and strategy of our government.  And hey, since no one really knows what President's Day is really about anyway and a good bit of the American population is already off from work, let's use that day to do this thing.  Make use of a good day off celebrating our Presidents and reinvest this time back into the country.

Idea #2: Let the President Be Our Host

The President should "host" the event, but the President should not be the only one speaking during the People's Roundtable.  He would moderate and facilitate as members of the cabinet and Federal offices presented.  Cycle through the head of the Office of Management and Budget, IRS and so on  Key players in the finances of our nation should be involved in presenting.

Idea #3: Make It Visual

Presentations could be infographics, pie charts, or whatever visual aids needed to be involved.  Maybe the government could hire a top-notch infographics and presentation firm to keep us from falling asleep.  Show it to me visually.  Use Muppets or whatever it took to keep us engaged.  Remember Ross Perot's graphs and charts that he bought time to show us?  Consider the strategy that goes into making a Superbowl commercial retain our attention.  If the government devoted that kind of effort into making us sit still throughout this event, we'd be much better educated at the end of the day.

Idea #4: Show How Money Flows In and Out

The basic structure should include income, expenses and objectives -- maybe one in the morning, one in the afternoon and the latter as more of a "fireside/where-do-we-go-from-here" session to wrap up the day.. Now, I know that our Federal spending and revenue isn't simple, but at least throw us a bone and give it a shot.  Be sure to provide comparisons to last year and maybe comment about why there's a difference if there is one.  This is a basic, fundamental concept of sharing finances with someone to whom you have to ultimately answer.

Idea #5: Provide Supporting Material Online

There will surely be questions that will not get answered in the allotted time period and that's to be expected with information of this depth and detail.  But gives us a place to go online that clearly correlates the presentations with additional data.

Idea #6: Create an Opportunity for Conversation Both During and After

For each department presenting, assign a "lieutenant" or two from that organization to be present in a social media war room during the event to answer questions about that session.  Dialogue, transparency and the opportunity to educate should be welcomed.

These are but a few ideas, but I can't help but think that we put way more effort and brainpower into that which doesn’t impact us the way that the operation of our government does.  While there is a need to for entertainment and down-time for us as a society, we most likely spend way too many hours consuming information that is of no real value in the long term.  We need to give a damn again and be willing to be patient and offer a vague attempt to understand just what's happening in the U.S. Government.

We've let the "State of the Union" address become unfulfilling to us as American citizens and I feel that it has lost its true meaning and intent.  Congress needs one address.  We need another, free of the pomp and formality of a "State of the Union" speech.  We want to hear from you, Mr. President, but help us understand what the nation's issues and objectives are in a format that allows us to absorb, digest and interact.

In the closing sentence of his wartime 1944 "State of the Union" address to Congress, President Franklin Roosevelt stated:

"Each and every one of us has a solemn obligation under God to serve this Nation in its most critical hour—to keep this Nation great -- to make this Nation greater in a better world."

This nation and its history of triumph, determination and perseverance deserves our attention.  Congress needs to hear from the executive branch of government. The American public needs to better understand the issues in greater-than-sound-bite form.

It's time we re-examine the President's communication channel strategy.  I want to listen to your "State of the Union", Mr. President. I'm still trying to determine, however, if I'm really supposed to be.

On occasion, being oblivious has its rewards.

For many of us, we are connected souls whose careers and/or happiness are satiated by a medium easily accessible by devices that a single hand almost autonomously clutches.

If you're like me, you may attempt the occasional self-imposed disconnect -- putting the smartphone or tablet in another room, shutting it off or even leaving it at home.  You may even try something like a few of my friends tried when they committed to the Unplugged Project's "24 Hours Unplugged", designed to be a group accountability activity.  But like Kary Delaria admitted after her failed attempt at "24 Hours Unplugged", disconnecting intentionally is difficult.

I admittedly love my smartphone and iPad and they do their jobs well.  They are a portal to information anywhere, anytime -- something for which my personality is ravenous (my DVR is full of documentaries on obscure events in history, scentific peculiarities, and other shows which help my wife fall asleep quickly).  When I bought my orignial Droid, I left the store after purchasing it and realized that I had never even tested the phone functionality.  I bought it because it connected me and I find uses for these tools everyday.

Disconnecting me from the world of information and social connectivity is no easy task.  The phone is almost always on my hip.  It contains a set of predefined ringtones and dings that easily differentiate between texts, tweets, Facebook messages and email.  I can communicate through all of these means with friends and family, but also stay connected to work email when away from the office.

Most of us don't have a masochistic desire to check work email while away from the office spending time with family, but rather many of us feel that if we don't, some calamity of epic proportions will occur and the only way that anyone will notify us of said calamity is via work email.  There's an assumption that no one would even remotely think to pick up the phone in a crisis and call the very same smartphone if immediate involvement was needed.  Email is "fire and forget", yet we have conditioned ourselves to feel obligated to check on the "firing" to see if the munitions are important.

"Sweet Oblivious Antidote"

But a wonderous combination of events occurred over my recent vacation that opened my eyes to a possible solution for throttling "weisure time" that afflicts many of us on vacation.

Early in my vacation last week, I happened upon the rare opportunity to be involved in watching endangered sea turtles being hatched and released on the Gulf Coast.  A volunteer, who lives in the neighborhood in which we were staying, was tending to a nest on the beach and mentioned that a nest nearby was due to hatch any night, usually between 9pm and 1am.  After talking for a bit, he said if I'd give him my number, he'd call me if they started to hatch and we could come watch.  Perfect.

That night, I put my smartphone by my bed and plugged in the charger.  As I did, a tweet came in and a notification sounded.  That was followed by an email notification.  I realized that I really needed to shut all of my "notifications" off, all but for the ringer of the phone otherwise the cacaphony would keep us awake all night.  A few settings changes and none of my email accounts, Twitter, Facebook or texts would cause a visual or audible notification on the phone from that point forward.  I read all of the emails, tweets and messages that had come in and all of my "new message" icons disappeared.

And I went to bed.

The call didn't come in that night.

The next day, we did the usual beach and pool activities.  No indication of impending turtle hatching then either.

And for several days, this same routine continued as I waited for a possible call.

Somewhere around the fourth day of our trip, it hit me -- I had not checked my work email for 4 days.  I wasn't getting email.  A brief panic ensued before I realized that I wasn't being notified that I even had email, and therefore I hadn't been diving into my inbox.

There was no envelope icon on the windowshade of my Droid.

No balloon indicating I had a text.

No Seesmic owl looking at me.

I had willingly made myself oblivious and it was wonderful and as it should be on vacation.  I was not feeling compelled to communicate and this was the defining difference.

In this accidental experiment, I realized that carrying a smartphone around might be more about the ability to react to the world.  It's about trying to not miss out on an event, conversation or situation from which me and my phone are currently removed.

Sure, I could've turned the phone off completely.  But in doing so, I would have easily recognized that the channel was closed.  But by turning off notifications, I simply fooled myself into thinking that the channel was still open, but that no one needed me.

It was a mind game accidentally played.

My Challenge to You

Try becoming "digitally oblivious" sometime.  Take your phone with you on vacation, but turn off every notification for any service you have.  Just because you become oblivious doesn't mean that you've left society.  The difference is that you're not at its whim and it can be amazingly gratifying.

And next time?  Maybe for the next "24 Hours Unplugged", we shoot for "24 Hours Oblivious" and see how we do.

(Photo by Robert S. Donovan)

With a potential announcement coming about Facebook and video chat being integrated to compete with Google+'s "Hangout" feature, I took a gander at Facebook's main page source code this morning.  Scrolling down to the area that loads the Facebook "Chat" functionality, I found these curious bits of code (highlighted).  Have they been there and we just haven't noticed?  Will we see Facebook video chat soon?

Three hundred and seventy eight.

That's the number of people that I currently follow on Twitter -- 378.  I have over three times as many followers, but the likelihood of me currently following you is relatively small.  And this is intentional and I want to explain why sometimes "more" isn't always better when cultivating your relationships on Twitter specifically.

Someone who follows thousands of people on Twitter recently mentioned to me in conversation how much easier my ability to follow and keep up with people was because I only had 300 or so people that I followed.

Exactly.

I probably don't currently follow you on Twitter, but that's not due to any pretention on my part.  It's not due to a need to withdraw or the desire to not know about you and what you're like.

It's actually because I care about you and I probably don't even know you.

When I choose to follow someone, I am really hoping that at some point in time I can take some piece of our relationship and connect you to someone or a source of information that can benefit you.  The only way that I, personally, am able to do this is if I have a chance to read your tweets, process what you've said or mentioned, get some insight into your personality and then store that away for later use.

And then I wait for the day when I can spot a bit of information that you'd like or when I might be able to connect you with someone who has your interests.

This week, I sent Leyla Arsan a link to an article that Stacey Hood had retweeted about Howard Stern.  Why?  Because from interacting with Leyla, I know she's a Howard Stern fan.

I also introduced Bonnie Lynn to Jen Jarboe -- two women who share a love for American muscle cars.

And yesterday, I thought about Shannon Whitley when I saw my teacher friend, Chad Brannon, post an article about the usefulness of cursive writing since I remembered Shannon questioning the need to teach cursive writing in a tweet a few weeks back.

So, see, the only way that I'm going to help you benefit online is if I take the time to figure out each person I follow.  My criteria for who I follow varies, but the criteria of who I choose to follow isn't as relevant as how long I wait to fill my feed with more personalities.

Using the weathered "cocktail party" analogy yet again, I'd rather stand in a small group in the corner where you're talking and listen to you for a while.  At some point, I'll mingle with another group, but I'll probably hang out there for a bit as well.  But I'm not one to grip-and-grin and move from person to person, only grabbing a name or a job location along the way.

Give me some time and let me learn all about the people I'm currently following.  They have good things to say.  But your success in the social space just matters too much to me for me to follow you right now.

What if Amazon.com bought WordPress.com?

What if there were an easy way to integrate content, cross-marketing opportunities, and a streamlined payment system all in one using a platform that millions of users around the world were familiar with?

The possibilities are certainly interesting.

Here are a few reasons why Amazon should consider buying WordPress.com:

An Existing Platform to Sell

 Millions of people around the world understand how to buy from Amazon.com.  Amazon has revolutionized product fulfillment in the internet age.  Still, publishers are trying to figure out how to monetize their content.  Amazon sells subscriptions to newspapers for the Kindle.  Look around -- who is selling longer-form digital content, doing it well and has a device that can display it in the format that they desire?  Additionally, Amazon makes it easy to "load up" an account with gift card credits which could be used for a subscription for content or a single-shot purchase of a work.

Cross-Marketing Opportunities

Amazon's store has both digital content and physical goods. With an integrated platform like Wordpress.com in its arsenal, the cross-marketing opportunities based on the content of a work are huge.  It would be affiliate marketing integration and then some.  And how about those "recommendations" built into Amazon's platform?  What if it applied to content too? "People who subscribed to this content also subscribed to..."  

Greater Opportunities for Bloggers

Earlier this month, Amazon announced a new platform called 'Kindle Singles' that was designed for content that was "twice the length of a New Yorker feature or as much as a few chapters of a typical book".  This may not seem like a big deal, but what it means is that Amazon's research has shown that there is an appetite for shorter content on the Kindle than traditional books.  They acknowledge it as being somewhat of an experiment to see what kind of content they get, but the potential impact is that it challenges bloggers and writers to develop and expound on ideas in order to monetize them.  It also could mean that over time, Amazon realizes that people don't want content even as long as initially thought and submitted works could get shorter, opening up the playing field to more authors with more concise works.

And the downfalls to a potential acquisition of Wordpress.com by Amazon?
 

 Platform Backlash

In his book, "the World Is Flat: A Brief History of the Twenty-First Century", Thomas Friedman described a cautionary tale of IBM's adaptation of Apache web server code to build its own product called "WebSphere".  While the layering of IBM technology on top of open-source software was a success for IBM, WordPress may face the same scrutiny and hesitance from the WordPress community if purchased by a company.  Questions would certainly arise about the roadmap and how well the platform would be supported going forward.

 Blog Reader Backlash

What if your favorite bloggers suddenly switched to "AmazonPress" and you were no longer able to read their content for free?  Would the public continue reading?  Would the reward of having a solid mechanism for monetizing content be worth the risk for them to switch to a paid-only environment?

These are just a few of my thoughts.  What do you think about such an acquisition?

This morning, Amber Naslund wrote about her experience with Hotel 71 in Chicago this week and detailed how a customer service experience went awry, but was quickly remedied by the manager at Hotel 71 after seeing her discuss it on Twitter.

As we have seen in many stories over the past few years, businesses are becoming more adept at keeping an eye on the social media space for complaints about their products and services.  Instead of letting a "customer service experience gone bad" explode into something unmanageable, more companies are quick to jump into a situation made public and help to rectify a volatile situation.

But this brought me to some interesting questions regarding companies who look to correct these situations:

Do we want a company to attempt to "make us happy" or would we rather have them go so overboard to correct a situation that we can't help but be happy?

Is meeting expectations good enough when a company wants to correct a poor customer service experience?

If you're like me, you've had bad customer service experiences in which the company you're dealing with has asked "what can I do to make this situation right?".  Companies want to put the control back in the customer's hands, giving them the opportunity to conjure up their own solution.  In some way, this should be more satisfying because we have control over our own happiness with the company.

But my hunch is that most people's nature is going to be to only ask for what is going to financially "null out" the situation.

While we may each have more or less financially than one another, our society is structured around fairness and equality where treatment is involved.  We want to be treated fairly.

With this in mind, it would seem that companies actually are missing an opportunity to overwhelm a customer with a positive experience by asking "what can we do to make this situation right?"  Society has tuned us to be just and fair and we may feel bad for asking for an upgrade in shipping, something additionally for free, or other special treatment that is above and beyond what was expected from the experience.  

So what does this mean for companies trying to excel at customer service?

In Amber's case, the manager of Hotel 71 took the situation to another level when he provided her with his cell phone number and then promised to send her an invitation to return.  She didn't need him to go to that extreme -- she wanted the situation to be taken care of and brought to the level of service initially expected.

But by going a step further and providing exceptional and outstanding customer service that went beyond what was expected, Hotel 71 gave Amber something that most of us do not want to ask for -- more than she expected. 

When we get more than we expect, we almost can't help but be excited and overwhelmed.

When I get more than I bargained for from a company, I rarely am put in a mindset of feeling dissatisfied.  Is your company providing "more than it could"? 

What would you prefer as a customer?

Should a company ask you what they can do to correct a problem with a customer service experience or would you rather have them take a shot at overwhelming you?  Let me know what you think.

(Photo credit: Striatic)

As bright as we all proclaim ourselves to be, we are woefully inadequate at helping ourselves and each other manage personal relationships.

I don't mean to imply that we don't know how to interact socially, either online or offline.  But I think there is a great opportunity for us to crowdsource our relationships together. 

I wrote about the idea of "metafolksonomy" a few months back.  It was the notion that if you crowdsourced Delicious-like tagging of people in the social space, that you could define an aggregate social profile of that person.

Businesses have embraced the idea of customer relationship managment (CRM) for years.  Converse with Jeremiah Owyang and he'll tell you that the concept of "social" CRM is going to be key as we move the concept of CRM forward with added social profile management components.

But what about those people who aren't in the social space that are part of my network?  How do I keep track of them, categorize their relationship to me and, even more beneficially, make my relationship to them useful to you?

I Need A Tool

There are some interesting tools out there to help you manage personal relationship and contacts for sure.  Tools like Gist and Rapportive help you manage your social network contacts and intergrate the management of those into your Gmail, Outlook or even Salesforce.com environments.

Several weeks back, I came across an interesting product called Jigsaw that integrates into the Salesforce.com CRM.  It's a jointly-maintained database of business contacts at companies all over the world; think of it as a "Wikipedia for business contacts".  So if I have a phone number for an executive at a company that I feel is more "up to date" than his profile that someone else has entered in Jigsaw for him, I can update the information to the most current data, and everyone who has that person as a contact will now have the new information.

So why does this have to be for business only?

If I have a contact in my network (think "personal" and not "social" for a moment), wouldn't it be great if I made the context of my relationship to that person available to everyone so that my connectivity to that person could be utilized by others?

This is the intent of LinkedIn from a business perspective.  But not everyone's on LinkedIn and the relationships I'm referring to may not suit LinkedIn.  Let me give you an example... 

"I had no idea..."

Let's say you have really been trying to made inroads in Company X.  You and I are friends because we were on a board together for a local charity.  You've tried and tried to get a consulting gig with Company X, but it'd be great if you knew someone there.  You check your LinkedIn profile and have no contact there.  Wouldn't it be good if you knew that my wife was a 3rd generation descendent of the man that founded Company X?  My wife's not on LinkedIn -- she's just someone you know because of me.  How many times have you found out this kind of information and thought, "I had no idea..."?

Now you know about that relationship -- how do you make this newly-discovered fact available for others that may know me?  This isn't something that Outlook's "contacts" area is going to help manage.  And even if I can manage my own relationships that way, it's certainly not going to benefit anyone else.  These "relationship affinity traits" somehow need to be captured and shared if we're all truly going to benefit from our personal networks.  If a Jigsaw-type repository for personal contacts and the relationships these contacts were involved in were available publicly, we could all benefit;  we might truly be but "six degrees of separation" away from anyone. 

Remember: Social Doesn't Mean "Online"

The world isn't completely "socially networked" yet.  Get involved in your local community and you will realize that the knowing how people interconnect and knowing how to leverage those connections is key to becoming integrated in making things happen.  But it's also important to remember that who you know offline can be just as important to those relationships that are primarily online.  We should find a way to combine the two so that all can find value in those interactions that we nurture.

So, what tools do you use to manage your personal relationships and network offline?

Facebook has finally hinted that it will be integrating some sort of Foursquare-like “check-in” functionality in the near future.  My friends on Facebook would see my check-ins.  However, Facebook would do itself a much greater service by leveraging a more valuable asset in its arsenal:

…the weight I place on my friends’ opinion in my personal network.

You see, it may be fun to see where my friends check-in.  I can identify with the places that they go and may even be able to find some folks when I am out on occasion.  This certainly can be used in various forms by marketers who want to leverage these announcements and turn them into loyalty programs or contests.

But I think that Facebook should really take a shot at looking at a total acquisition of Yelp.

Yelp and Facebook already have been integrated in the “social graph”, with Yelp becoming one of three of the first “instant personalization” services that Mark Zuckerberg announced at this year’s F8 Facebook Developer Summit.  With Yelp and Facebook connected, you can visit the Yelp site and see which of your friends are on Yelp.

So why is Yelp functionality so much better than a check-in feature for Facebook

Because I value the opinion of my friends, not just their location.

Yelp is a great service for finding services nearby my current location.  It’s extremely helpful in unfamiliar cities to find restaurants and other services.  I can easily pull up a list of nearby restaurants and see how users have reviewed them on a 5-star rating system.

This is where Facebook has leverage.While I value the opinions en masse of people that I don’t know, how much more weight would I put on the opinions of people that I do know?

What if I could easily pull up Facebook on my mobile device, let it locate me and then see what my Facebook friends had to say about the services in the area?

Even “that guy” that you’re friends with on Facebook who you tolerate has an opinion and that opinion carries more weight than a stranger’s.  Why?  Because you know just how much you aren’t like him and you can make a choice based on what he likes and dislikes.

My network has weight.  The network’s opinion has weight.  And those opinions may be more likely to drive me to one business or another.  In a recent focus group conducted at my employer, we found that when people need a service, they tend to go to “friends and family” first before looking in the Yellow Pages or even online.

My connections and their opinions matter.  Where they happen to be, to me, is merely static.

So I suggest to Facebook something that they've already thought about time and time again and that Robert Scoble mentioned even back in March of 2009: go after Yelp.

Do you think that Facebook is better served with check-in functionality over "friendsourced" reviews?

As some of you know, I recently returned from a trip to Alabama's Gulf Coast for a brief getaway at our rental home, Alcedonia.  This has been a troubling summer for those of us who love Gulf Shores, Alabama due to the Deepwater Horizon oil spill disaster.  What started out as any other promising summer of rentals for us quickly turned into something akin to a tugged rope covered in oil as we began to see rental cancellations occur and a general hesitation develop in the region toward visiting the Gulf Coast.

This was our first trip to Alabama’s coast since the blowout of the well technically identified as “Mississippi Canyon Block 252”.  We weren’t sure what to expect from the blue-green waters that I have grown up with and that I now share with my children. 

Would there be oil sludge on the beach?  Would there be tarballs?  Would the ocean breeze have a reported “diesel fuel” or exhaust smell?  Would I let my kids get in the water?  Would I get in the water?

There were many unknowns.  I came away surprised.  I also came away with some realizations of how much of a PR challenge the Gulf Coast has in front of it to recover after this oil disaster.

First, if you’ve never been to Alabama’s coast, let me give you a brief overview:

• Yes, Alabama has a coast – 33 miles of it to be exact.  Once during a report on a hurricane, cnn.com actually referred to the storm making landfall somewhere “along the Mississippi/Florida border”.  As you can see,  there is no Mississippi/Florida border and Alabama’s beaches lie in between.  And, technically, since the Gulf Intracoastal Waterway cuts across Alabama just above our beaches, Alabama’s Gulf Coast is on an island.


• Alabama’s beaches are beautiful -- There’s a geological reason for this:  The sand on Alabama’s beaches has a high concentration of quartz and it is almost like sugar.  Millions of years ago, receding waters pulled portions of the Appalachian Mountain quartz down to the point where the land now meets the Gulf, depositing large amounts of the fine grains with it.  I have been to beaches across the country and around the world.  To this day, the sand on Alabama’s beaches still ranks at the top of my list.  They squeak when you walk, they’re thick and deep, much like a child’s sandbox.  There’s no driving on them unless you’re in a tractor – they’re too soft and powdery.


• No one much knows it’s here – It’s really not that we try to keep Alabama’s coastline a secret.  Since it’s such a small sliver of land, however, no one much knows that our beaches even exist.  Only during hurricanes and now the BP oil disaster do people hear about our shores.  If you come down once, you’re likely to return for this very reason.  Gulf Shores and Orange Beach aren’t packed towns and they have a great family atmosphere.  You can see how the coastline looked only a few decades ago in some of these postcards.

Grabbing the Slippery Rope -- Alabama Gulf Coast PR

Once oil started flowing from the now-sealed BP well, businesses and government along the Alabama Gulf Coast realized that several actions needed to happen:

1. Attempt to keep currently-booked vacationers from cancelling reservations and thus lowering the revenue to the area.


2. Inform the public about the current state of beaches and oil impact.


3. Acknowledge a reduced revenue stream from visitors due to uncertainty about booking new vacation reservations and encourage businesses to reduce rental rates and tout off-beach activities.

Rental companies have been doing their best to convince concerned customers with reservations that the beach is looking better each day and that there are still pools and off-beach activities to participate in.  The Alabama Gulf Coast Convention and Visitors Bureau launched a series of video “daily beach updates” to let potential visitors know about beach conditions each day and also highlighted any local events going on that tourists could participate in.  And you’ll find quite a host of discounts to be had on rental properties all along the Alabama coast, some as much as 50% off of normal rates.

Even Lucy Buffett, the sister of Alabama entertainer Jimmy Buffett, jumped in and offered her face and voice to keeping people coming back by participating in a TV ad created to keep people coming back to the area.

One Person’s View of Alabama’s Gulf Coast

When I arrived, I expected to see oil tarballs and have to use Dawn dish soap to clean my feet each day before heading into the house.  I even expected some oil sludge, to see skimmers offshore picking up oil slicks and beach crews combing the beach. I expected to be at the pool most of the time.

But I saw very little of all of that.

Yes, there are tarballs washing ashore, but in any one spot, you might see a couple of handfuls.  They are easily avoided.  There was a skimmer boat offshore about ½ mile.  There were cleanup crews from BP’s subcontractor, Crowder Gulf, on a section of the beach down from us.

But I was in the water.  My kids were in the water.  There was no smell of oil.  The water was probably clearer than I have seen most any time at the beach, so much so that we would all walk out and watch the nesting blue crabs in the surf and spot schools of stingrays at dusk.  As a matter of fact, I’d have no idea that an oil spill had even occurred had I never heard about it.

Reselling the Initially Unsold

A new ad campaign is in production that will feature Alabama native and “Friends” star Courtney Cox talking about her memories of going to Gulf Shores as a little girl.  This will follow an ad campaign featuring Alabama entertainer and “American Idol” winner Taylor Hicks promoting the sandy beaches of Alabama.

Governor Bob Riley has said that some BP money given to the state for tourism promotion will be used to stage a series of Gulf Coast benefit concerts to keep tourists coming to the area into the Fall.

But it’s largely one of the wonderful attributes of Alabama’s Gulf Coast that may be a problem in turning the behemoth ship of public opinion around and convincing the average vacationer that Alabama’s shoreline is a great place to visit again:

....no one much knows that the beaches even exist here.

If you have a hidden gem like Alabama’s Gulf Coast, it would seem that you would need to:

a) make people aware that your resource exists, and
b) highlight the fact that while it does exist, it’s worthy of coming to see and is not affected by oil to the magnitude shown on TV

Rebound from Disaster Will Be the Result of Word of Mouth

Alabama’s Gulf Coast is probably not going to see its rebound result from massive ad campaigns.

I submit that word of mouth is going to be what reassures and brings people back to the area after the BP oil spill.  It is going to take families hearing from other families that they took their vacation there and had a marvelous time.

This is one reason that I offered up our beach home to my friend and Gulf Coast resident Tom Martin during the recent Jimmy Buffett concert benefitting the Gulf Coast.  I wanted Tom to tell the story of what was happening here, how people were being affected and show just what it was like on the beaches.

I am probably much more likely to trust the opinion of those I know over a celebrity on a TV ad.  Much like reviews of a movie or restaurant, if I know what you like and I know you well, then I will value your review much more than that of a stranger.  We need people to come down and tell their story when they get back home.

The best PR is going to be people talking to people and leveraging the trust in those relationships to make a decision to come see our beaches.

We need thousands of "one person's view".

And if you want to come down to Alabama’s Gulf Coast and return to tell a story, I’ll be glad to help you do so – not for the sake of my own interests, but for the sake of a beach I grew up on and will continue to take my kids to for years to come.

I trust you.

We all have that favorite company that has provided great customer service to us in the past.  Many times, we stick with these companies for no other reason than the lasting effect that one particular customer service experience had on us.  We become loyal because of the overwhelming desire by a company to satisfy our basic needs.  In some cases, we may even continue a loyal relationship with a company in spite of the fact that prices may be higher than a competitor's.  What differentiates these companies that gain our loyalty from ones that are always trying to gain our loyalty?

When Providing Relief and Satisfaction, Does Price Really Matter?

While browsing the medicine area at our local supermarket recently, I noticed a very odd arrangement of the Pepto Bismol brand of stomach medicine on the shelves.  Side by side were both the regular strength and the Pepto Bismol "Max" extra strength bottles.  I wasn't ill at the time, but began to wonder...

When would I EVER want to settle for regular strength when the most effective, most powerful version of this product is right here and available?

Would I ever be doubled over in stomach pain, dash into the store and begin making decisions about price points between these two products?

Would price point matter if I had a strong need?  Most likely, I'd be willing to pay just about anything to get my "symptoms" to go away.  After all, a quick glance shows that the exact same symptoms are satisfied, but one just happens to do it with greater strength and voracity.

Companies Who "Get It" Help Me Stop Vomiting... Quickly

Companies all have staff to serve customers. Staff can take money from a customer and provide a service or good.  This is "regular strength" -- it's what we expect from a relationship with a company.  When companies shine is the point at which they go beyond "regular strength" and provide a service or product that sets them apart from their shelfmates.

Why would any company desire to be just good enough when it comes to customer service?

Will you really lose that much money by spending more time with a customer, providing them with a lower-cost item that meets their needs just as well as a pricier one, or possibly even taking a return from a customer no questions asked?

Companies should stop and consider what will make customers feel better, not just less ill.  A net zero outcome is not what we should be striving for when providing outstanding customer service.  We should always be aiming for positive relationship equity in each contact we have with our customers.  Customers are willing to pay more for a product for consistent and outstanding customer service, not just an experience that satisfies a need.

Inevitably, something will go awry and a customer will have an experience that is less than positive.  Relationship equity is exactly what we'll need when our customers begin to feel ill toward us.