Sugar is Sugar?

“Whether it’s corn sugar or cane sugar, your body doesn’t know the difference. Sugar is sugar.”

Have you seen the corn maze television ads? At first I thought the ad was anti-high fructose corn syrup, but it turns out it was trying to do the exact opposite—save the sweetener’s image.

See the YouTube version here.

Talk about a lofty rebranding/PR campaign. Since sales of food items containing HFCS have gone down recently as people opt for healthier-sounding options, the Corn Refiners Association has launched a full-on battle to save their refined sticky stuff. Their main form of attack against the haters is…changing the name! Say good bye to HFCS and hello to corn sugar! But it is, of course, the same product…will the name change help convince the American public it’s just as okay as cane sugar?

Fast Company has a great article on the rebranding, and they included this quote:

"This seems to be a last-ditch attempt to try and salvage a product that they know is not good for Americans," says Ellis, one of the co-producers and stars of the 2007 documentary King Corn, as well as a Food and Society Fellow with the Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy. "They have lost some of their biggest customers as more industrial food companies are converting to table sugar or more natural ingredients than that. Companies are reducing the empty calories in their products."

The sweet mom in the corn sugar ad says that scientists, nutritionists, etc. have confirmed that the two sugars act the same in the body, and CornSugar.com's health claims are actually valid. The FC article says that pound-for-pound HFCS has similar dietary characteristics as table sugar and doesn't even have as much fructose as some fruit, a fact that's been confirmed by leading nutritionists. Both types of sugar are still sugar when they enter your body -- although a recent Princeton study refutes that, claiming that rats fed HFCS gained more weight than those fed with cane sugar.

Ellis says the real problem is that HFCS is cheaper to produce than sugar, and therefore pumped into lots of over-processed, high-calorie foods as filler. These foods are more attractive to customers because they are cheap, and it is these cheap, unhealthy foods that are attractive to consumers and have probably been a main contributor in the rise of American obesity.

Whether the CRA’s campaign is successful is yet to be seen, but it seems they’re on the right track to convincing a good part of the American public that since cane sugar is apparently okay, corn sugar is, too.

-------

FOLLOW-UP

I'm not the only one that's been fascinated with this campaign. Check out this article by Dr. Andrew Weil...

Fortunately, 'Corn Sugar' Has Become a Sticky PR Mess

Tiger Woods' Reputation Not on Par

The Tiger Woods drama has been a fascinating public relations case study. How should he have handled the aftermath of his car accident and the rumors of an affair? Surely not by avoiding the issue and allowing rumors to fly unaddressed and by posting vague and guilt-ridden statements on his website. There are multiple conversations on this topic from PR professionals in the blogosphere.

Here's what the Phoenix Business Journal had to say:

"'There's only two things worse than whatever really happened outside Tiger Woods' house: speculation and the appearance of a cover up,” said David Eichler, founder and creative director for David and Sam PR in Phoenix. “When you make a billion dollars by being a celebrity you have no privacy. No matter how egregious the truth is, Tiger's camp would be well served to learn from history and not try to run, hide or pretend they don't owe the public the truth.'"

And Kevin Sullivan for Yahoo Sports echoed that statement with this:

"When Tiger Woods let 13 hours lapse after Friday's early-morning accident without issuing an explanation, he ceded control of his story not only to legitimate news outlets, but also to celebrity gossip mongers on the hunt for a tale –- made up or otherwise -– of adultery and mayhem. The story of Tiger's first major off-the-course bogey was in their sights and the race was on to fill in the juicy details."

Sullivan also said that in general you should, "Tell it first, tell it yourself and tell it all. That is the tried and true formula for handling a messy public relations crisis in the smoothest possible way."

Tiger definitely dropped the ball on this one.

Just how big of an effect has the controversy had on Wood's reputation? Here is what Rasmussen Reports discovered:

"The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey found that just 38% of Americans now have a favorable opinion of the golf superstar. That’s down from 56% a week ago, shortly after the stories first broke about Woods’ auto accident. Two years ago, 83% had a favorable opinion of Woods. "

Wood's reputation has dropped 56% in one week! The ramifications of this are huge. The midnight accident in the driveway and multiple affair rumors will no doubt take a huge hit on his profitability, not because of the events in and of themselves, but because of how badly they were handled. The American public is very forgiving (Bill Clinton, anyone?), but the longer you keep them in the dark, the worse your chances of redeeming yourself will be.

To validate the above claim, all one needs to do is look at what happened with David Letterman's recent sticky situation. Instead of avoiding the issue, he announced his multiple affairs with members of his staff promptly and in his typical humor. The consequences? His ratings went up.

Becoming a master networker

On Friday I got to cover the world’s first Social Media Awards, sponsored by the Social Media Club of Salt Lake City. I’m glad I attended the event because I learned about some organizations and individuals who are totally taking advantage of social media, such as NewspaperGrl.

You can read my article about the awards given during the event here, but one of the most fascinating and inspiring parts of the evening was a keynote address by David Bradford, CEO of Fusion-io. What his company does isn’t as relevant to this post as how he is involved with social networking on a daily basis.

Bradford said he spends up to two hours daily on social networking sites because the ROI (return on investment) is so high. He makes a concerted effort to meet people, and after talking with them he grabs their card and immediately adds them to his LinkedIn or Facebook profile (he’s actually maxed out his friends on Facebook), he said.

I added Bradford on LinkedIn, and the next day he sent me a personal response: “Nice to connect with you, Amanda. Thank you for reaching out. Best regards, david b.” Wow- a CEO of a moderately sized company acknowledged a little person like me. He really is good at networking.

Something Bradford said that got me thinking was this: for networking to be effective you have to go out of your way to help people. “Great networkers are always looking to do something for somebody else,” he said.

Networking karma is real—it comes back around.

You never know what connection is going to lead you to your dream job, or how far your connections can take you. I have gotten some great jobs through connections, including my job as a ski instructor at Sundance. I didn’t have to do much to convince the director to hire me because I got a great recommendation from my co-worker at Snowbird, who happened to be his wife. While I was associating with her I didn’t think, “If I’m nice to this lady and if I impress her, she will hook me up,” but I always respected her as a more seasoned instructor and took her wise advice. I had no idea who her husband was until she told me she was recommending me to him.

Since a CEO like Bradford must get tons of resumes thrown at him, especially considering how nice and open he is, I asked him what people can do to stand out in the crazy, fast-paced world of social networking. He basically said to schmooze. He said you should talk to potential bosses about how interested you are in the company and how you would like to help them achieve more success.

In his conclusion, Bradford talked about how networking takes a lot of work and requires a lot of hours. “Master networkers are individuals who realize that networking is a life skill,” he said.

Becoming a master networker takes a great amount of WORK, but the efforts to connect can pay off greatly if done right.

Retailers finally truly recognizing who keeps them in business

Customer opinions have long been a much sought-after commodity by all types of companies and organizations. Surveys abound in both online and paper format, but, unfortunately for the opinion-seekers, less and less of their target audience is responding to the call for information. This is a big issue for corporate America because research is not only paramount in public relations and marketing strategy, but also in determining many decisions an organization will make regarding one of its publics.

The question public relations and marketing professionals who have any interest in market research are asking themselves is this: How do we motivate people to respond to the surveys we so badly need in order to make good decisions? The answer up until now has been incentives, incentives, and more incentives. Cash and prize drawings and discounts on product are often attached to surveys in an attempt to entice people to take a few minutes of their time to relay their experience, whether positive or negative. Some companies— California Pizza Kitchen is one example—even have an automated phone survey advertised on the bill.

The incentives have worked to a point. Organizations still haven’t been getting the quantity of responses that they would like. (One professor told me the survey response level for paper surveys is around 7% or lower.)

Retail and hospitality organizations, among others, have started getting to the heart of what is ingrained in any organizational behaviorist. That is, extrinsic factors can only motivate people so much. According to theory, offering 10% off a customer’s next bill at CPK will never motivate people like tapping into their intrinsic need for recognition will.

So, after much preface, here is the newest trend in surveying: RESPONDING to the respondents! And not just with a computer-generated email, but with a real, personal acknowledgement to one’s efforts in appeasing the organization’s thirst for ratings.

I, for one, feel quite special when a big retail player like J. Crew sends me a personal response to my comment on their exorbitant shipping costs. Even if they alter their way of calculating shipping costs to what I want (and what I feel other customers want—cheaper!) based upon my single negative review, at least they are listening and responding to my grievance. They acknowledged my concern and then skirted around the matter like a tactile lawyer defending a guilty criminal, but that’s OK. At least they are attempting to form a better relationship with a lukewarm customer and, in turn, enticing me to give them more responses to their survey requests in the future.

What this means for PR professionals is this: simply asking for information from people without giving something back is out. If you truly want to build relationships, you must put some time and effort in responding to people individually. It may seem pricey and time-consuming at first, but in the long run it will increase the effectiveness of the messages you send and better motivate people to action.

Nobel Peace Prize surprised both Pres and Americans alike

President Obama accepted the Nobel Peace Prize this morning, stating in a press conference that he is "surprised and humbled" by the award. America seems to be really surprised, too. The Nobel Committee stated that they gave him the award for his "efforts." They are sure that Obama will bring about some greater good in the future. But since when do people win awards for what they plan on doing? Are athletes in the upcoming Olympics going to win golds based upon who comes up with the best plan to win their event?

Even more interesting is the fact that the deadline to nominate candidates came just 10 days after Obama stepped into office. It's not really his fault he didn't have time to actually achieve anything, right?

But it comes at no surprise that an unachiever like Obama got the award. He now joins the ranks of other winners like Al Gore and Yasser Arafat. Why should the committee give the NPP to altruistic individuals with no political agenda like Mother Theresa when we have global warming proponents and terrorists who need some additional recognition?

I've been following a lot of Tweets about this topic and some have been humorous, others thought provoking. Here is my favorite from alextvalencic:

Kanye: "Yo, Barack, I'm happy you and I'mma let you finish, but BEYONCE has been the greatest peacemaker of all time!"

My reply: American pop culture + politics= great humor!

The best advice I've heard for Obama is from Scott Jennings, a senior political strategist for Peritus Public Relations.

Jennings advice: Don't accept the award. As a result of this unprecedented move, Americans would see Obama as truly "humble."

PR mag by students

Here is a great online PR magazine published (is it still published if it's online?) by students at the University of Alabama. What a great student project.

1 in 8 Million

The New York Times has just featured an LDS sister missionary serving in Chinatown, New York. It's part of their "1 in 8 Million" series, which is a very cool concept in and of itself. She only converted to the church three years ago after studying economics at BYU. I wonder how she was led to BYU; she was obviously in the right place and prepared to hear the message of the Gospel. the best quote, pointed out by my friend Kristi Boyce is, "It was never easy for Christ, so why should it be easy for me?" What a great example of gung-ho missionary service and some great PR for the church!

Check out her story here.