Bullying rates soar with the help of new media.

British council statistics have shown that UK secondary schools are the worst for bullying in Europe with over 2 million children seeking professional advice from their GP’s for emotional or psychological distress. The UK stands to have the highest suicide rates in Europe with over 5000 citizens taking their own life each year, and it is estimated that there is a new suicide every 82 minutes. It is evident that bullying is playing a significant role as the cause of this self-inflicted loss of life. Whether it is within the work place, at home or at school, bullying is a key factor.

My question is this; could these frightening statistics be prevented? And in terms of helping the under 16’s, are we the parent doing all we can to help avoid the devastating results that bullying can lead too? Or is it simply now too difficult to tell before it is just too late?

It is a hot topic in the media at present that with the help of new media, bullying is something that cannot even be avoided from the hiding out point, of the victim’s bedroom. Now recognised as “cyber bullying” , bullies are able to make contact via their mobile phones, social media sites such as Twitter, Facebook or YouTube and  using these tools to further communicate in an abusive or threatening manner causing further embarrassment for the victim. Making it almost impossible for young children to ever escape the horrors they may have to also face during their day at school. Is new media therefore becoming a significant factor in this increasing number of deaths? Recent media coverage would argue yes.

In the past month alone, TV shows including celebrity stars such as Jodie Marsh, Cher Lloyd and Gok Wan have all played a part in promoting the impacts bullying is having on the younger generation today. These shows have included victims who are currently being bullied speaking out, celebrities voicing their past experiences and also the parents of children who have taken their own lives as a result of bullying. And through all these shows one thing is ringing clear, a lot of the abuse being received is coming via the internet.

Robert and Tracy Mullany are forced to live with the devastating effects of cyber bullying.  In May 2010, they found their 15 year old son Thomas hanging in their back garden, believed to be the result of the abuse he had received from bullies at his school via social media. His parents do not believe these bullies intended to kill their son or drive him to his death, but they simply did not understand the result their communications would have. They are now fighting for a law that states cyber bullying is an illegal act and for further education to be given to teachers, parents and the police to communicate the implications.

Claude Knights, director of the children's charity Kidscape, said she also wanted to see a change in the law. She said: "This is such a harrowing case and it shows how horrendous these situations can get”.

Facebook operate an over 13 rule and anyone who joins the social media site has to agree to their full terms and conditions that clearly state acts of bullying and harassment will not be tolerated, but it currently stands that up to one in three British children had been the victim of cyber bullying. The statistics prove rules and regulations set by the social media sites are not enough to deter bullies of the dangers their actions may lead too.

“Beatbullying” are a charity working with children and young people across the UK to help stop bullying. They offer a variety of ground breaking programmes which include “CyberMentors” and “MiniMentors” that specifically focus their attention towards cyber bullying. This includes educating young children aged between 5-11 (MiniMentors) and 11-18 (CyberMentors) that are not only the victim of cyber bulling but may also have bullied.

The “Beatbullying” website states, “we empower young people so deeply affected by bullying that they can barely face going to school every day. We help young people to support each other. We help young people that bully to change their attitudes and behaviour. We shape attitudes, and change behaviours”.

Although these programmes are primarily aimed towards children, “Beatbullying” do allow parents and teaching professionals, to also get involved, to educate and advice on the signals that could point towards cyber bullying.

Cyber bullying is such a delicate yet hot topic in the media at present, if approached in the right manner we as a country could have the power to turn this negative into a positive. Yet while we continue to brush the topic under the table, we are inevitably allowing it to continue to happen. “Beatbullying” could play a key role in turning this negative into a positive.

The fault for these dreadful statistics does not lay solely with the parents, teachers or even the bullies; it does however sit with the British education system in that action this must be an on-going process within schools to help provide each of these parties with the understanding and consequences cyber bullying can lead too. 

Kelly Ward

H&M Versace. Oh dear...

THE CUSTOMER MUST ALWAYS COME FIRST...right? Well perhaps H&M are trying a new technique, one that could have serious implications.

On Thursday 17th November H&M, recongnised for it low prices, lauched a massively publicised clothing range where by they have collaborated with Versace to produce a limited edition of dresses, jeans, tops and shoes, produced with the high end designer label intact but at high street afforable prices. Obviously creating excitement by the fashionista's of the world.

The public were promised ten minutes inside any H&M store worldwide stocking the goods, with one item of clothing per person. Seems reasonable right? But unfortunately not. It appears that when stating it would be a "limited" edition, H&M really meant it. Within 30 minutes of opening their doors, all stocks had sold out worldwide, with most who had queud for over 24 hours, left standing in the cold...(depending where you were located of course).

Ok so first come first served. But with reports coming through that special treatment was given to Fashion Journalists, Fashion Bloggers and VIP wrist band holders, have H&M simply ignored their existing target market and aimed directly at a whole new market resulting in massive uproar and serious longterm implications.

There are mixed reviews, but it would appear that a large amount of people who camped overnight and queued for hours, would not usually shop at the high street store and were simply targeted in order to get their hands on that worshipped Versace label.

But fear not, at least for those of us who were unable to get to a store and queue for hours in the hope of getting our hands on some of these fantastic goods had the reassurance of ordering online...wrong. The website crashed under the strain from the high demand they received, although a statement was released to apologise and the public were advised that H&M were doing all they could to get the website up and running again, but by the time it was, all stocks had sold out.

H&M may have made an executive decision that this collaboration was not targeted at the usual H&M shopper, perhaps they thought it wouldn't appeal to them, and this may have been a thought out marketing decision when joining up with the top designer.

But why did H&M publicise the launch so drastically, creating a massive hype to a wide audience? They would have always known their stocks were limited. Therefore it looks as though they have encouraged more and more of their local consumer base to attend, to then have to slam the doors in their faces within half an hour of opening. The company have now allowed themselves to look unprepared, deliberately understocked and careless about those loyal customer. All for a quick bunk up with some posh totty.

H&M may have boosted their sales but they have ultimately frustrated their exisiting client base and in effect lost alot of their loyal consumers. If I had been promised just as much of a chance to get my hands on these goods as one of these top fashion bloggers, (who probably never shops at the store, and can possibly afford the real deal). If I had stood outside for hours whilst the VIPs were being led into the warm and treated like royalty, but then refused entry for not being worthy enough to come in, even though I have shopped at H&M loyally over the years, I wouldnt be happy right now.
In fact I dont think I would bother shopping at H&M again. I think I may even tell my friends how loyal the high street clothing range is to their main consumer.

Oh dear H&M what have you done...

Welcome to the real world.

Its a well known factor that the value of print in contrast to online news is vastly decreasing in its value to the consumer. I spoke of this a few weeks ago and the effect this would likely have for the future of the good old Newspaper.

And then I spotted the story below last week...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/help/insideguardian/2011/oct/10/guardian-newslist

It backs up my point entirely, would you not agree?

So, The Guardian have decided to open their doors and allow the world to see what really goes on in the mystical world of Journalism...I think its a really great idea. I also love that they are going to use social media massively to their advantage and have mentioned how viewers can give them feedback and tips etc using the famous Twitter #hashtag.

Obviously they cannot reveal everything, but in terms of striking up a bit of publicity and interest in news, its a great way to create some interest, probably not costing a great deal either.

Would this have happened five or ten years ago? Undoubtedly. But it shows yet again, how the Media are having to move with the times by embracing Social Media and using it as a powerful and positive tool.

I will definately be Tweeting #opennews and letting them know my views.

Measuring the value of PR

Over the last decade their have been increasing debates over the reliability of AVE (Advertising Value Equivalent). Is it a good way to measure a clients coverage and does it really tell us how much ROI our client has had as a result?

Its something I have only recently became aware of but after scanning the net and checking out some PR blogs/weekly news it appears to have been an ongoing topic for quite some time now. If I'm completely honest measurement is not something we spend much time focusing on within university, and come to think of it, I feel it should be. After all its not all about the initial publicity, we need to be able to review any successful or negative campaigns in order to know what we did right or how we could improve next time.

When I recently did a placement within a PR agency, I found myself mainly focusing on getting the coverage, and only a brief amount of my time was spent on the outcome. Obviously coverage was observed on a daily basis and mornings were spent scanning all the daily papers/mags to see how much coverage we had obtained and getting cuttings to show our clients. But when it came to presenting the findings and putting together the final presentation to show our client how much of a success the campaign had been, and how much money we had saved/made them, it didnt appear that much time went into this process.

Obviously this is only one example and I may be completely wrong. But when observing how much space we had obtained in papers/magazines it was simply a matter of checking the relevant media database, seeing how much the coverage would have costed in advertsing costs and simple - we have the cost of the coverage...

For me I wasnt really too concerned about whether it was a reliable way to tell a client how much money we have saved them, as I was working in entertainment PR, (as opposed to Financial PR) and generally they would only be expecting an "average" anyway. But my concern, after observing, was how little time was actually spent on measurement as a whole. Surely this criteria of PR should be just as important as the coverage itself? Otherwise how does the industry expect to be taken seriously as a profesion if they have no reliable findings to prove what they do?

I will be very interested to see when getting a job in the industry next year how other agencies/in-house PR companies analyse measurement as a whole, is it something that is beginning to be taken more seriously?

This is a topic that is fairly new to me so I'm keen to find out other peoples thoughts and will obviously be looking out for more news on this debate...

How does your personal life affect you career choices?

Feeling very reflective today. Have been thinking alot about my career and personal life, its the crazy the amount of thoughts my mind can produce, some rational, some not. But it did lead to me to wondering why i may have chosen to study a Media related course and why I want to work in this industry?

I havn't really come to a conclusion just yet either. But I have started to wonder, do our personal lives have an impact on our career choices? And do our careers define who we are as people?

In my personal life I am a fairly independant person, or at least I was before I decided to go back into further education. I enjoy taking care of myself, being by myself and dont feel that I need to rely on another human being to guide me through the big decisions I make in life. I enjoy change, and I am not afraid to take chances or gambles if it means I could be better off in life.

Then I think about what I'm doing my degree in, Public Relations. This a fast moving, dynamic industry where you will have to work damn hard if you want to keep up, be successful and allow yourself to stand out. I wonder why I chose to do this for a living? And i wonder whether as I get older and change as an individual in my personal life, will I still want to do this for a living?

Its a strange thought to have had but I didnt always want to work in Public Relations. I decided to take this career path as I was working a standard 9-5 job that required no thought or challenge and when looking into degree choices PR stood out to me as it differed to that completely.

I have spoken with people who have also taken Media related degrees and a large majority have not stayed in the same field throughout, whether it be because a new opportunity arose or they just fancied a change, its a broad industry which is a very good thing to allow you to move around.

Its an exciting prospect when you are starting out your career fresh from university, you dont know what the next twenty years have in store for you and where you may be. I'm going to watch my life, watch the things that happen and the changes that may occur in my personal life/career life and see the impact that each have on one another.

RIP Steve Jobs

I will openly admit that I am not an obsessive over technology, it really does not interest me. But I just wanted to write a few words and make a firm point on the sad passing of Steve Jobs. Not because I appreciate his genius creations or invention of computer products, but because he was an example that no matter what life may throw your way, if you show true determination and ambition, anything is possible.

An attitude far to many lack in this day and age.

RIP Steve Jobs

The Media NEVER forgets

Each day there will be a damaging story in the paper. Whether it be on an organisation or an individual. Unfortunately once its being printed it never goes away. It may be ten, twenty or even 100 years down the line but you can be sure that once that negative story has come through its almost certain to one day rear its ugly head again. Mark my word, some point in the future when you least expect, or need it too.

Crisis Communication can help convince your Publics something or someone is a postive public figure, but once you have been tarnished with a bad brush it is much harder to change the public opinion as people love dirt and mud does stick. Its that old saying "Schadenfreude" we all love to relish in others misfortune.

And for one bad story it could take over 100 good ones just to attempt at getting the public back on side again. But now with resources being so easily available via the internet, its just too easy to click a few buttons and trace that negative story again...so best behave.

An example of someone getting unwanted attention from the Media at the present time is Amanda Knox who was yesterday aquited for the murder of British Student Meredith Kercher.
For the past four years the Media have shown an extreme interest in the American Student nicknaming her "Foxy Knoxy", because of her love of partying and sexual nature, and generally because she is an extremely intriguing person to have followed. The question now in the media is what the furture now hold for Knox and the decisions she makes will have a massive impact on her reputation as a whole. Should she have a good PR team guiding her she will hopefully fade into the background and not use this unwanted publicity to make money, as the media are now speculating.

Obviously the Amanda Knox trial is an extreme example of the impact the Media can have on an organisation/individuals reputation. Over the past four years the Media have effectively convinced the public to question and be suspicious of this individual through stories of her private life and the way she handled the murder enquiry as a whole. But now she has been aquited I suspect the way the public perceive her over the coming weeks will change dramatically dependant on the route she decides to take. One thing is for sure though, should Knox choose to go public and discuss her view on the trial and how she has been treated, she will never ever be able to get rid of the view that people will always have on her. Yes she has now been proved "not guilty", but in the back of most of the public's mind will always be a leering dark cloud and the image of the spooky, strange character that has been carefully constructed and portrayed to us over the past four years by the Media. That is something she is very unlikely to EVER get rid of.

Overall ones reputation is tarnished.