“Hear me, hear me…I have a message”
I know what you’re thinking…Burrows has lost it! What does he mean content is NOT King? He’s said before that content is king. He’s re-tweeted and shared others who have said it so why has he flip-flopped on this?
Well, I hear you loud and clear. Up to a couple of weeks ago I fully supported the notion that content is king, but yes I have changed my tune.
I still support the idea that content plays a HUGE role in your online presence. Without good / great content, you are just another Tweeter, Poster, Sharer. Your content is probably the second most important thing you can do to create a voice within all the noise around you.
So, if content is the 2nd most important thing and it’s not the king what is? Simple:
Your MESSAGE
Your MESSAGE is King. It trumps everything else. It is what will raise you above all others or it is what will destroy you. If you don’t like the word message then insert your mission in it’s place…but since we’re talking communication, let’s stick with message.
Your message is you. It is what you stand for. It is what you believe in. It is what others look to you for and what makes them come back for more and sets you apart from everyone in your field.
In the policing world, the message is simple. We stand for good vs evil, right vs wrong. Locking up the bad people, protecting the good people and ensuring everyone is treated fairly. That is our BRAND. That is our MESSAGE. That is what is most important.
Think about this in your field or industry.
Confusion:
If something happens that goes against what you stand for (your message / your brand) it creates a confusion in your mission and how others perceive you.
- Why was the financial collapse so deep? It wasn’t any content that killed the faith in our banks. It was the fact we trusted them to make the right financial decisions and they didn’t. The message and the reality collided.
- Why have people lost faith in politicians? They sell us a big sell on fairness, equality, promises and what’s best for the people and then we find corruption, lies and personal gain at the cost of the public. The message and the reality collided.
- Why is it such huge news when a police officer gets arrested for drunk driving? Because the event went completely against the message. Why is it that the average everyday person who gets charged with drunk driving doesn’t receive any attention in the media? Probably because that person didn’t build their public message on always doing right.
If you think about some of the biggest screw-ups that have been caused by errant tweets, or poorly timed posts, it hasn’t been the content of the post that has caused the problem…it’s been the message confusion that has at the heart of the matter.
Here’s my favourite that is specific to social. “We are committed to offering the public a greater way to engage and talk with the police.” Then when it hits the fan, or a tough question is posed or someone points a finger the response is deafening silence. You can’t have it both ways. All you do is create a confused message. “We’ll listen and talk, but on our terms.” This is wrong and damages the overall message.
- If you can’t respond for legal reasons: Say so.
- If you can’t respond because you don’t have all the facts yet: Say so.
- If it’s a statement that has been made that is just wrong: Say so.
The worst thing you can do is leave the conversation or ignore your public when you have said you are there for them.
This goes way beyond just the social space. This goes into your everyday dealings and operations.
For policing, everything from the way we speak to people, parking illegally (yes we’re exempt, but that only goes so far with the public perception), getting arrested or charged are all ways in which we confuse our message.
Yes, we represent all society has to offer. The good, the bad, but we are held to a higher standard and we rightfully need to live up to that standard.
So is content king, or is it the son of the king…THE MESSAGE.
I wonder if your content can relay the message as well? What do you think the difference is between content and a message? Just wondering. More precise and to the point for a message?
Hey Jo. Thanks for the comment. Content can cover a variety of topics and ideas. The problem occurs when your content differs from your overall message. IF you say we’re open, transparent, honest (content) and then it is found there are lies, deceit illegal activity the message gets killed by the actual content. Yes, I believe that your content needs to convey your message. If not in direct words, certainly by the things you share, post, Tweet, ReTweet, etc. This is where you can see how fragile the whole system is. Brands can set the standard of what the message is, but its front line can shake that. The important factor then is to stand up and say, that’s the person not the brand.
That is a great question Clickflick. Content and message both say things about your brand and organization, either explicitly or implicitly, as does any communication you produce. I would agree with Tim that content needs to convey the message – many social media communications often lack a clear purpose or message, and a high volume of hastily prepared content, if not directly message-related, can create confusion, dilute the brand, and cause viewers to tune out. Communicators and content creators need to ask themselves: Why is this communication important? What is the best form for this message/communication? How does this communication fit in to my organization’s strategic communication plan? What is the desired end of this communication? How or why will people want to interact with this content, or join the conversation?
Too much unnecessary noise and clutter, as research has demonstrated, will cause the audience to disengage. In that respect, I would argue that content and message are INSEPERABLE – every piece of content should contain your message, and every message should be married with the appropriate type (and form) of content. If you don’t know what your message is, you may want to re-think why/how you are communicating in the first place. Simply posting content does not necessarily mean you are communicating a message, and just creating content does not automatically imply meaningful audience interaction. The biggest question to me is: Why is this communication important? Is this the appropriate form to communicate my message? How (or why) will people want to engage and interact with it? How will I create opportunities for interaction and discussion after my ‘content’ has been posted. Too often, we are simply still ‘broadcasting’ one-way communication using new forms – which is great for news and alerts, etc – but what we first must ask ourselves is: How can I truly engage my audience and create discussion?
Very well said Marty. Thanks!
Thanks, that does help considerable for my next blog,Must print this one off. 1st page to Bible for blogging! Again, U rock!
Tim – you are so right on. Politicians and even private corporations would do well to follow this model that, in my humble opinion, it seems more and more law enforcement agencies are figuring out: public engagement means for better or worse. You’ve captured what the entire conversation is about – maintaining the integrity, the public confidence and trust that is absolutely essential to the successful operation of a police agency, Integrity is the overarching theme of all our interaction. Nicely done, partner! (I’m in Idaho, I can say things like “partner” 🙂
Thanks Lynn! Partner is more than welcome anywhere as far as I’m concerned!
Most definitely agree that it is the overall message we transmit that is paramount and messages or other conversations should not conflict with the primary image or reputation you are attempting to convey. The public message one posts is fundamental to a person’s or agency’s reputation that they wish to establish. A reputation can be built that supports the mission and values you hold – or – it can be destroyed by one or more errant words or actions. The impression and legacy we leave is based upon the perception we project, regardless of who we are or what we do. As professionals, and most particularly those in law enforcement, we need to be responsive, approachable, genuine, empathic, respectful, and consistent – all the while connecting with the public and providing protection. The manner in which we conduct ourselves online reflects our personal life and beliefs, as well. It is who we are – if we are true to ourselves, we should not feel the need to become someone else during our private lives. The community policing programs I am involved with require the utmost integrity and professionalism, yet are treated as open forums and opportunities for the public to voice their opinions, provide information, and interact with the police. We encourage all interactions and will respond in such a manner that the indvidual(s) are treated with respect and dignity. If we have an answer, we provide it; if we cannot respond at the moment, we state so and why; if presented with a dissenting comment or situation, we handle it in a positive and sensitive manner. This has proven quite successful for us.
Thanks for the comment Dawn. Love your last line so much:
“If we have an answer, we provide it; if we cannot respond at the moment, we state so and why; if presented with a dissenting comment or situation, we handle it in a positive and sensitive manner. This has proven quite successful for us.”
Tim:
Completely agree with you, and glad to see that you are promoting what the true values of a career in law enforcement are about.
How many times have we said, through our careers that so-and-so is simply talking out of his or her posterior or giving us lip service? Not, of course, simply in the police service, but in all walks of life. In today’s day and age of instant communication and social media, people are far more savvy than we originally were. If we don’t respect the people to whom we are directing our message, how in God’s name can we expect them to respect us?
Even to put it in terms that any law enforcement professional, indeed any professional of any stripe can understand; none of us are perfect and all of us will make a mistake at some point in our lives – getting out in front of the mistake will go a long way to mitigating the ultimate effects of that mistake, than will clouding the message and attempting to hide in some fashion or another. How many times did we wish a bad guy would take that tack, and attempt to advise them to do so, yet then know of people within our ranks who then simply turned around and ignored all their own advice?
My biggest and favourite example of something like this was when I read newspaper articles about Peter C. Newman’s expose on Brian Mulroney. While never a Mulroney fan, I cannot help but support him when he was asked by the media about reports of what he said in private taped conversations about this person or that entity. The media were looking to slam him, and ride the wave of the exposure created by Newman. Mulroney aptly put it all to bed by admitting that yes, he did indeed say those things…he shouldn’t have…but he did. Alas, the wind in the sails of the media evaporated. Later, however, in public hearings, he could not remember what he received in a plain manilla envelope at a Montreal hotel, from a lunch meeting with a business associate…and the controversy over that still haunts him, I am sure.
Make sure the message and the content of your message, whatever media is used, say the same thing.
Hat’s off to you, Sir!
Damien C. (remember OPC???)
Great post Damien! Thanks for taking the time to post your comment. I really appreciate it!
As soon as I saw your name, OPC is exactly what I thought! Hope you have been keeping well!
Pingback: #CopChat – Wednesday September 10 – Topic | Walking the Social Media Beat