Washington Post reporter Bob Woodward is acting like many of the politicians he covers — trying to spin his way out of a jam.

Woodward had this to say on CNN earlier this week concerning an email from senior White House official Gene Sperling that used the the word “regret”:

“It makes me very uncomfortable to have the White House telling reporters you’re going to regret doing something that you believe in.”

However, when the actual emails were released, they revealed Sperling’s email was largely an apology for an earlier heated phone call with Woodward. Sperling’s “threat” was put this way:

“I do truly believe you should rethink your comment about saying saying that Potus asking for revenues is moving the goal post. I know you may not believe this, but as a friend, I think you will regret staking out that claim.“

If Woodward felt “uncomfortable,” he had an odd way of showing it in his response to Sperling’s email. He wrote, “You do not ever have to apologize to me. You get wound up because you are making your points and you believe them. This is all part of a serious discussion. I for one welcome a little heat; there should more given the importance.”

Since the two emails call into question the actual “threat,” Woodward made a clumsy attempt at damage control on MSNBC this morning, “I did not feel threatened.” This spin is especially difficult given his own newspaper, the Washington Post, wrote a story stating he had been threatened.

Woodward, the co-hero of the Watergate investigation, leaves us with a lesson worth remembering. Reporters can get caught up in spin, too.

The writer is a former TV news journalist who teaches a mass media course at the College of St. Rose. Media consulting is part of his small business.

No one is born a great speaker. You have to work at it. Speaking is a skill that needs to be developed, like any other skill. The claim someone is a “natural” at speaking underestimates what it really takes to be great. Some people say Derek Jeter is a natural, too. Then, why does he work so hard at batting and infield practice?

It’s true some people are more extroverted by nature and more comfortable in front of people. But comfort level can be altered and being relaxed is just one aspect of great speaking. The first step in great speaking is good research — finding out what the audience really wants to get out of the presentation and then designing a program to exceed those expectations. Great speaking is about editing, taking a large body of information and paring it down for the audience. Sharp editing and the use of concise language are learned skills and very few people do them really well. Listening is also needed in presentations, a skill that doesn’t come at birth either. How well does your two-year-old listen? How about your teenager?

A speaker once told me he didn’t need my coaching help because he was able to easily “wing it” in front of the audience. I replied, “Yes, it appeared like you were winging it.” He wasn’t connected with what his audience was thinking.

Speaking also requires us to get constant feedback from our audience — what they like and don’t like. It is the only way to get better. No truly great speaker is ever completely satisfied with his/her performance.

Great speaking, as much as any field I know, is open to everyone. It’s not what you were born with, it’s how you use what you have. With the right coaching, the sky is the limit.

The writer is a professional speaker with many speaking coaching clients. Don’t hesitate to contact him for help. His speaking book is available here.

New Research Report on News

The bad times for traditional media are getting worse and nearly every citizen is becoming part of the mass communication landscape. The question is, “Are they ready for it?”

A new report from the Pew Research Center reveals newspaper employment is off 30% from its peak in 2000 and local TV audiences were down “across every key time slot and across all networks in 2012.” Average revenue for news-producing stations dropped 36% from 2006-2011.

Ironically, these cutbacks have made traditional media outlets less capable of confronting the very competition that is pulling them under. Instead of providing more in-depth, quality coverage that would give them the edge over the many other information sources, they are doing less. In fact, about 40% of local TV news content last year was weather, sports and traffic. To add insult to injury, the non traditional information producers are getting much better at using technology to circumvent traditional media all together.

Everyone on Facebook is now a publisher. This is enormously good and bad news. It’s good because a few powerful media outlets will never be able to command the attention of the masses again. This is a body blow to media bias because such power can never really be entrusted to any small group. Mass communication today is far more democratic and the diversity of views has expanded beyond our wildest dreams.

And now the bad news. Journalism requires skill. Accuracy, fairness, context, clarity — no one is born with these traits, you have to learn and refine them. The Internet is the “Wild West” of information consumption and it’s hard to locate the good among the bad or to even know the difference if you did.

So what lies ahead for the age of the citizen communicators? That story has yet to be written. We’ve upped the ante on being interesting. Our education system must place more focus on developing communicators who care more about what their audience wants than what they want. Greater skill is needed in story telling. When was the last time college entrances exams tested for that? Concise language and savvy use of visuals are tools that are needed more. And everyone needs a plan on how to be informed. It won’t ever happen by chance.

Those who achieve these skills will own the 21st century. They will have a much better chance at happiness.

As for those in traditional media, the best storytellers will always have an audience. And the gatekeepers…they’ll never have it like they once had.

The writer, a former TV anchor, owns a communications business and is an adjunct media professor.

“If it takes someone more than 20 years to notice how to properly use ‘it’s,’ then that’s not a learning curve I’m comfortable with.” – Kyle Wiens

Kyle Wiens

IFixit CEO Kyle Wiens won’t hire people who use poor grammar. Wiens gives all job applicants a grammar test because he finds people who make fewer mistakes on a grammar test also “make fewer mistakes when they are doing something completely unrelated to writing — like stocking shelves or labeling parts.”

A new analysis of the writing in LinkedIn profiles draws a correlation between good grammar and professional success. The higher up you go, the better the grammar gets.

Consider these statistics:

LinkedIn Profiles Studied: Grammar Mistakes per 1,000 Words
Director Level or Higher – 8
Below Director Level – 20

Grammarly conducted the study and its CEO, Brad Hoover, said the study “clearly supports the hypothesis that good grammar is a predictor of professional success.” Of course, there are many other factors that lead to professional success. But the report should make us think.

I’m a strong believer in conversational writing that omits much of the bureaucratic speak that bores us to death. But casual writing and good grammar are not mutually exclusive. Why not make good use of them both?

The writer owns a communication business and is an adjunct college professor. Don’t hesitate to contact him for communication help.

Nike Facebook ad

Infidelity isn’t really so bad. Nike says so.

A new Tiger Woods ad available on Nike’s Facebook page that proclaims “Winning Takes Care of Everything” has sparked a fierce debate. Woods just regained the world’s no. 1 ranking as a golfer for the first time since his marriage scandal became public in 2009. Nike hopes to cash in on his new success and is doing what it hoped to do with the ad — draw attention to Tiger and their company.

There’s been passionate and mixed reaction. One Facebook entry (Eric McDonald) stated, ” ‘Winning’ didn’t take care of his little girl who saw daddy teach that women are expendable sex objects.” Another (Janice Owens): “Any behavior is OK as long as you win at sports? This is a HORRIBLE message to send to young people.” Ad supporters countered, (Kyle Janiga) “Most of you need to get a life and look in the mirror..no skeletons in your closet?” Another (Robert Gecy) wrote, “Most of the naysayers have an ax to grind with Nike or just don’t like Tiger in the 1st place.”

The ad is controversial because it confronts our values. Just where does winning fit in our list of priorities? How great an offense is infidelity? What is the time frame for contrition? Is all publicity good for selling sports gear?

Nike claims the ad was simply “a salute to his (Tiger’s) athletic performance.” They would also tell you they were shocked to discover there was gambling going on in Rick’s Cafe in Casablanca (1).

Do you believe Tiger’s humiliated ex wife feels his improved golf game has “taken care of everything?” What about his kids? If Nike believes “winning takes care of everything,” why did it dump cyclist Lance Armstrong? He won seven Tour de Frances.

Our real heroes don’t swing golf clubs, dunk basketballs or star in movies. They do the everyday things that matter to their families and their customers. Not one of them is perfect. And yes, many everyday Americans cheat on their spouses. But they don’t ever suggest sports achievement makes up for it.

There’s no question Tiger Woods is a great golfer. But he needs to take a mulligan (2) on his latest ad.
###

The writer is former TV journalist and adjunct media professor who runs a communications firm.

(1) In the 1942 film Casablanca, Captain Renault proclaimed he was “shocked, shocked” to learn there was gambling in Rick’s Café, as he pocketed his winnings for the evening.

(2) In recreational golf, if you hit a poor shot off the tee you’re allowed to “take a mulligan” by  taking another shot.

Siena’s new hoop coach, Jimmy Patsos from MAAC rival Loyola, will feature a “run and press” style of play. Patsos called the Siena appointment, “the college job you dream about,” and appears genuinely excited to get the job.

In an interview with Siena’s play-by-play announcer (The General Robert Lee), Patsos said Siena has a “national brand” and he wants to “get the program back where it used to be.”

After three losing seasons, Siena fans are hungry for wins. The selection of Siena coaches has involved some Russian Roullette in the past two decades. McCaffery and Hewitt were great successes; Beyer, Lanier and Mitch were big disappointments. Loyola was 1- 27 the year before Patsos arrived and he did eventually win the school’s first MAAC championship in nearly 20 years in 2012. But he won just 52 percent of his games in nine years, respectable considering what he started with, but not overwhelming.

Siena season ticket holders’ first impression of Patsos was not positive because of his over-the-top courtside demeanor. He’s toned that done considerably in recent years. Patsos is well respected by other coaches and players like him.

Patsos gets the “Siena thing” when it comes to student athletes. If you don’t go to class at Siena, you don’t play.

Patsos said “the TU Center and the passion of the fans” are two big aspects of the program. As for the players, he said, there are “really good pieces here” but that there will have to be a “rebuilding process.”

Here’s to hoping rebuilding goes quickly. It’s been too long since our last dance.

The writer, a two-time Voice of Siena Basketball, hosts the Siena Alumni Connection program on FM 88.3 The Saint.

The NY congressman who made national headlines for sending lewd photos of himself to strangers is considering a run for New York City mayor.

I can just see the bumper stickers now.

No doubt testing the waters, Anthony Weiner and his wife gave in-depth interviews that were the heart of a lengthy NY Times Magazine article.

As I stated on the Chuck and Kelly Show this morning, Weiner has a tough hill to climb, very tough, but I wouldn’t say it’s impossible. New York voters have a high tolerance for misbehavior by their politicians. Weiner’s original offense, strange as it was, didn’t actually involve any sex and didn’t appear to break any laws or misuse taxpayer money. That puts him ahead of Spitzer, Rangel and the long list of crooked state legislators now in trouble. Weiner also has a $4.3 million war chest and another $1.5 awaiting him in matching funds.

Weiner’s polling confirms, as he puts it, “there’s a healthy number of people who will never get over it.” But he wants “to ask people to give him a second chance.” Second chances must be earned. Weiner has two principle challenges:

1- Convincing people he is truly contrite.
Contrition for ambition’s sake is not true contrition. His wife, Huma, must play a role here. She must convince voters she really believes her husband is sorry. Oprah, Barbara Walters, whatever. The public has to witness this exposition, from both of them, and judge for themselves.

2- Answering the Bizzarro factor. Is he fixed?
How can an ambitious congressman think sending lewd photos to strangers not cause him trouble? Is this man stable enough to run NY City? Weiner still hasn’t given a real answer to the question, “how could he do it?” He said, he “viewed it as so frivolous” and “it was just another way to feed this notion that I want to be liked and admired.” He’ll have to do better than that.

The Times article presents a theory this potential run, even if unsuccessful, might put the episode behind him to set up a future run. Perhaps. In the end, voters make choices based on what they think is best for them.

I don’t think Weiner would stand a chance in Kansas. But, then again, they don’t ban big sodas there.

The writer is a one-time elected official and small business owner who provides political consulting and crisis communication counsel. More here.

Have you heard? Breaking news coverage of huge stories has become variety show programming. In the span of about 15 minutes Wednesday, I saw or read these reports from media outlets:
AP, CNN, Fox:
An arrest has been made in the Boston Marathon bombings
ABC News:
An arrest is imminent in the Boston bombings
CBS, MSNBC:
No arrest has been made in the Boston bombings

Conflicting Reports

Scratching your head? How could experienced journalists who know being careful is so important present such conflicting reports?

Since official public notification usually runs behind what “sources” tell the media in such big stories, journalists rely on their sources to get the scoop. There is fierce competition and a 24-hour news cycle. Being first on a major story can make a journalist’s career or provide him/her with incredible exposure. They almost beg their sources for hot tips and sources love to give them. It makes them feel important or they like being owed a favor, or some times, they just feel the real story needs to be told.

Some times, even good sources get it wrong. They’re not in the loop as much as they think, they misunderstand what was said, or things change unexpectedly right after they talk with the reporter. That’s why multiple sources are preferable. As consumers, we’ve also become accustomed to screw ups in the early moments of breaking stories, so the penalty for getting it wrong isn’t as devastating as it might be.

Journalists should place a higher priority on getting it right than getting it first. Easier said than done in this environment.

Consumers should rely more on multiple sources of information. It’s the path to being well informed. And be wary of the first reports just as the big story hits.

The writer is former TV anchor/reporter who broke a number of stories using sources. Feel free to call on him for media counsel or training.

Gloversville was on Good Morning America this morning, in a case involving a ding-a-ling.

Police in this city of just over 15,000 people in upstate NY arrested two operators of the Snow Cone Joe ice cream truck, for allegedly harassing and stalking the competition, Mr. Ding-A-Ling.

Josh Malatino

A local paper reports the male operator told his rival, “This is my town!”

As far as phrases go, this story is as good as a congressman named Weiner showing his private parts. It definitely is adding to the circulation the story is getting.

At first glance, you might think this is a case of two people losing their cool. But police say Josh Malatino and Amanda Scott harassed a Mr. Ding-A-Ling driver on three separate days in April, following the truck, blasting their music and offering “free ice cream.” The police chief had even met previously with Malatino and his attorney to discuss the issue.

Would you send your seven-year-old to buy ice cream from Malatino?

The Sno Cone Joe operators need to

1- Issue an immediate apology
We’re sorry for our inappropriate behavior. There’s really no excuse for it.  Competition is part of doing business and we recognize it benefits the people who matter most to us— our customers. We also regret the trouble we’ve caused our rival and the Gloversville police department.

2- Enroll in anger management course
With the right counseling, people can behave better. This exercise in humility will begin immediately.

3-Donate a small portion of each sale to some worthwhile Gloversville charity or other cause. Want to be accepted by the community? Help them out.

Act fast, like ice cream, the chance to respond melts away quickly.

The writer is a former TV anchor/reporter and current media specialist, radio host and adjunct media professor. Contact him should you require help in the media area.

A woman who didn’t want to be interviewed by a Providence TV reporter had her two pit bulls attack the reporter. View a clip of the incident:
Dogs Bite Reporter

The episode raises difficult news media issues.

(1) How hard should you press for an interview?
Getting interviews no one else gets makes the careers of journalists and persistence is admirable and necessary. But was the reporter here (Abbey Niezgoda) persistent or too reckless? Once the woman (Melissa Lawrence) started throwing rocks Neizgoda and videographer Marc Jackson should have left the scene. No story is worth your life and this could have been a fatal incident. After all, Lawrence, a mother whose daughter had just been shot, had no obligation to speak to anyone.

As the tape shows, Neizgoda even went back to Lawrence after having been bit. She’s got guts, no doubt, but the pit bulls could have killed her.

(2) Should the videographer have come to the reporter’s aid?
The videographer continued to shoot tape instead of helping the reporter. Should he have stopped shooting and helped? That’s a tough situation.  The first rule in reporter-videographer relations is to have each other’s back. But how could the videographer have helped given the dogs were chasing the reporter down the street? Taping the incident frankly makes a star out of the reporter (this is prime resume tape stuff) and also provides the evidence needed to charge the dog owner. The real question is what would the videographer have done if the attack had gotten more serious or even deadly?

(3) What is appropriate behavior when being bugged by the media?
This requires some reasoned thinking and never includes siccing your pit bulls on the news team. Lawrence committed assault and deserved to be charged (two felony counts). When pressed by reporters, never lose your cool. If you do, that’s certain to make it on the air. Be calm and persistent about not being interviewed. That ends it right there.

Every news reporter/videographer team in America should be discussing today what their expectations are of each other on a shoot that becomes dangerous. It’s critical they are on the same page before something explosive occurs.

The writer is a former TV news anchor/reporter and an adjunct media professor at the College of St. Rose.

Steve Lance

Marketers and creative directors don’t speak the same language. How do we fix that?

Multiple Emmy Award winner and the former Creative Director at NBC Steve Lance says the friction between the two groups won’t improve until they speak the same language.

“Defining process is critical,” said Lance, speaking at an Albany Ad Club event in upstate New York. As Lance puts it, creative people don’t like process…. until they see it work for them.

Lance says giving creative people clear direction on what is needed, rather than trying to dictate to them how to do their work, will produce more positive results. Just because creatives are free spirits, that doesn’t mean they don’t want clarity. As the late Ogilvy and Mather legend Norman Berry often said, “Give me the freedom of a tightly-defined strategy.”

Lance says marketers need to reach customers “in an emotional place” and the creative people must be aligned with that effort. He emphasizes “actionable research” that’s relevant and digestible and having a specific strategy document that leads to measurement everyone can understand.

One more tip for bringing the two groups together, “Have pizza at the meeting. It’s a cue it won’t be about the blame game.”

Mark Grimm is a former TV anchor who runs a message strategy and speaking coaching business. Don’t hesitate to contact him for help.

Celebrity chef Paula Deen needs a new PR recipe to escape the hot water over racial remarks.

The 66-year-old from Savannah, Georgia admitted during a sworn deposition last month she has used the N-word. The deposition involves a lawsuit from a former employee who is suing for alleged sexual and racial harassment at Deen’s restaurant.

In 2012, Forbes estimated Deen’s annual earnings at $17 million so she stands to lose millions as sponsors cut ties with her.

Deen’s 13-minute appearance on The Today Show Wednesday produced a glaring contradiction in her story. She told Matt Lauer she only used the N-word once in her life — during a bank robbery in 1986. But in her deposition, when asked if she’s used the word since the robbery, she replied, “I’m sure I have, but it’s been a very long time.” She also said there is a mean and “non mean” use of the word. When asked if it is mean to use it in a joke, she said, “Depends on how it’s used in a joke.”

Deen did tell Lauer “every one of God’s creatures was created equal” and that many “hurtful lies” are being circulated about her. Her tearful appearance did arouse sympathy in and support from many viewers, while many others remain unconvinced.

Deen must

1- Set the record straight on her use of the word
2- Condemn any use of the offensive term
3- Stop suggesting her problems are a result of “sabotage”
4- Settle the lawsuit. Its disclosures will add fuel to the story.
5- Take effective racial sensitivity training
6- Have African Americans who believe in her speak up for her

Deen is a genuine “rags to riches” story and Americans appreciate the fact people have evolved over the years on racial understanding. But Deen needs to cook up a much better response or her empire will get scorched.

The writer, a former TV anchor/reporter, is a crisis communication expert and media analyst. Don’t hesitate to contact him for help.

Shame can be a good thing. It can hold people accountable for the mistakes they make. At its best, it can lead to true contrition and a genuine desire to change behavior.

And then there’s Eliot Spitzer.

The former NY Governor and no-holes-barred prosecutor wants to make a comeback from the prosecution scandal that ended his governorship. He’s running for NY City Comptroller. Spitzer maintains we all have “urges” and his failing was he didn’t keep his in check.

Can’t say I’ve ever had an urge to be with a prostitute, have you?

Yet, Spitzer believes he should be leading us. His comeback has little to do with public service. It’s about ego and limelight. His race is a political calculation about just how low the voters’ standards are. “There is not a standard of purity that applies in public service,” he said. If there was, “we would have a very short list of individuals who could then serve.”

Spitzer no doubt made the late entry into the race because he saw how well Anthony Weiner was doing in the polls for mayor. Weiner is another sex oddball with a comeback story and big ego.

Their races are more about the electorate than they are about the men involved. Just where do the voters’ standards lie? Is this the end of shame? Or the beginning of a new standard.

Elections matter.

The writer, a one-time elected official, is a political and communication strategist and speaking coach.

Many people take the wrong approach to the job search and you may be one of them.

The resume is often where trouble begins. Leading with your “objective” is a waste of the few valuable seconds of attention your prospective employer gives you while zipping through resumes. Employers care little about what you want. They want to know how you can help them.

Get into the employer’s head. Good research is not so much about knowing when the company was founded. It’s about checking around to see if you know anyone who knows your interviewer and discovering the emotional buttons that will produce the best response.

Start with a summary that clearly describes what you bring to the table. What are the things in your background that make you valuable to the employer? Be plain spoken and avoid bureaucratic jargon.

List accomplishments, not titles or duties. If you were V-P of this or that for four years, show what you got accomplished while there. Employers want to see proof. Be prepared to produce it. Example:

Wrong:
Supervised a sales staff of four, offered strategic advice and provided input on various areas of operations. Blah, blah, blah.

Right:
Supervised a sales team that produce a 67% jump in sales in three years. Our staff  turnover rate was cut in half under my supervision.

On salary, never tell them what you are making. If they ask, say ” I feel that is proprietary information I wouldn’t like to share.” If they ask, “What would you like to make, respond with, “What salary range do you have in mind?” Do your best to get them to put a figure up first. It may be more than you were hoping for. Career consultant Maggie Mistal recommends you don’t bring salary up until you have convinced them you’re a superstar. They may then be willing to go for a higher salary than they anticipated.

Remember, nothings sells like passion. Show enthusiasm for what you do and how you can help.

The best way to catch trout is to fish in a trout stream, so swim in the right streams. Network where you have the chance of making the contacts that will help you.

Don’t forget to follow up with a note if you are still interested in the job. A real letter beats an email every time.

There is something special about each of us. Don’t keep it a secret. Knock ‘em dead!

The writer runs a communication consulting and coaching business. Do not hesitate to contact Mark for help.

An Albany radio station made national news this week after airing an interview with an imposter of former Yankee Shane Spencer.

On Monday, the imposter appeared on ESPN Radio 104.5 FM The Team posing as Spencer, claiming “Spencer” used steroids during his playing days about a decade ago and cast suspicion on beloved Yankee legends.

It was all nonsense.

Of course, the first culprit is the man who called in. But the radio station also erred twice: (1) letting him on in the first place and (2) the way it reacted.

In the age of caller ID, it doesn’t take much to check any call that appears suspicious. Their suspicions should have been heightened by the controversial remarks. They weren’t. In fact, the Monday afternoon interview remained on the station website until Tuesday, when the real Spencer called the station. He heard about the interview from a friend. Spencer, who considers himself “a good role model” for kids was rightfully “appalled and outraged.”

The station’s response may be more troubling. It arranged to interview the real Spencer and it repeated the imposter’s false claims. Even worse, the station and the host took no responsibility for the fiasco, blaming it on the “criminal actions” of the caller.

The imposter doesn’t hold the license to the station. It is responsible for every word that gets broadcast. The station’s response might have stated:

We regret the harm the Shane Spencer imposter caused to Mr. Spencer, to the others named and to our credibility. We will take every step possible to help him set the record straight. We are reviewing our procedures to make changes to help prevent this unacceptable and embarrassing episode from ever happening again. 

This is a teaching moment. Time for The Team to step up to the plate.

The writer is a radio host, adjunct media professor and crisis communications consultant. More at markgrimm.com.

All great speeches have the same fundamentals. When Ashton Kutcher accepted a Teen Choice award in L.A., he came prepared. It was one of several traits that made his speech a winner.

Preparation:
His preparation included a simple outline for his speech – three major points. He knew his audience and made it about them, clear advice for young people.

Authenticity:
He believed what he was saying and said what he believed. He highlighted personal examples of hard jobs he had growing up. He followed this rule: Show them, don’t tell them. “Opportunity looks a lot like hard work…I’ve never had a job in my life that was better than me.”

Relevance:
Teenagers and their sexual image and identity is an incredibly topical discussion. This heartthrob spoke plainly about “the sexiest thing in the entire world.” “Being really smart, he said, “and being thoughtful and being generous. Everything else is crap.”

Passion:
Hand gestures, body language, voice all showed he was fully engaged.

Clarity:
Every speech is a story. He told one. No laundry list of items, nothing complicated. Three things – opportunity, sexiness and how to live life. “You can build your own life that other people can live,” he said, “So build a life. Don’t live one. Build one.”

Even slipped in a plug for his new movie. Can’t fault him for that.

Do your speeches follow the same path. If not, why not?

The writer is a professional speaker and speaking coach who has written, Everyone Can Be A Dynamic Speaker: Yes, I Mean You! Contact him for speaking help.

On August 28, 1963 (50 years ago), Martin Luther King Jr.’s “I Have a Dream” speech at the March On Washington had such impact it is still being felt today.

What made it so powerful? To begin, it wasn’t just about racism. It was about patriotism, freedom and justice for all, and about unity.

The traits from the speech provide a wonderful lesson for any speaker no matter their cause.

1- Authenticity
King was jailed 29 times in a life of non violent protests. Your words carry more weight when you have walked the walk of your message.

2- Passion
Dr. King, no doubt, had stomach butterflies as he prepared to address more than 200,000 people that day. Obviously, he was able to channel that nervousness into positive energy. He was passionate. Why should anyone care about your topic if you are not passionate yourself? Though civil rights was, and still is, an extremely complicated, he effectively used passion and clarity to convey a simple, straightforward message about his “dream.”

3-Clarity
The clarity presented in King’s speech can be outlined in a single paragraph. With effective use of symbolism and visuals, he began with a Lincoln reference with the Lincoln Memorial as a backdrop. He made a powerful case in order to define the injustice that existed, citing specific examples of racial wrongs. While he expressed a defiant tone attacking racism, he also saluted his “white brothers” and called once again for nonviolence. His speech was not simply a collection of powerful rhetoric; it included a call for action to “remind America of the fierce urgency of now.” That call for action was reinforced by a simple yet visionary phrase, “I have a dream.”

4-Relevance
If the speech was relevant to African Americans alone, it would not have had the same impact. It was, in part, a patriotic speech, appealing to all Americans to make their country better.  It was relevant to all Americans that one day all children would “not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.”

5-Takeaway
All great presentations have at least one compelling takeaway. King’s takeaway was clear and compelling —- “the situation can and will be changed.” The following year, Congress passed and President Johnson signed the landmark Civil Rights Act of 1964

Authenticity, passion, clarity, relevance, takeaways — all great speeches have them. Try to put them in yours.

By the way, the speech was just 16 minutes long. One of the most common mistakes in speaking will come as no surprise to you — they often last too long!

The writer is a professional speaker and speaking coach as well as an adjunct media professor. His book is Everyone Can Be A Dynamic Speaker. Yes, I Mean You!

Please share this link with anyone who might be interested.

Ed Mitzen

Winning formulas have different ingredients and there’s no doubt Ed Mitzen has one.

The Palio ad agency he founded with others grew to 160 employees before it was sold. He started all over again in 2008 with FingerPaint, an integrated marketing firm in Saratoga, NY. It now has 87 employees and $16 million in business.

There are no titles and no separate offices at his firm. “Titles are the nuclear arms race in the ad biz.” Instead, the Mitzen culture emphasizes a collaborative spirit which is especially important in today’s integrated communications environment. Every employee gets a 100 shares of company stock on their first day, vested after five years.

I want my employees to “know they are appreciated” and the most fun I have at work is “seeing everybody look like they are happy to be there,” Mitzen says.

Other Mitzen tips any business owner can use:

1- Hire people smarter than you and then get out of their way
2- Leverage the personal relationships with every one you know
“90% of our work traces back to personal relationships.”
3- Recognize no one takes your business as seriously as you do. Mitzen usually arrives at work by 6 am, sometimes earlier. Though he’s out by 5 pm.
4- Keep perspective. When his boy was just one-year-old, he dropped him on the floor because he was so tired from 16-hour days at his job. He quit the job the next day and started his own business.

There’s a likable off-center way about Mitzen. Employees bring their dogs to work so the company’s carpet was laid down in patches so they could remove pieces of carpet if a pet made an unexpected deposit. And he watches Jonny Quest episodes in his free time. It’s a cartoon series that debuted in the mid 60′s.

Mitzen has never had a layoff.

Sounds like the formula is working.

Mitzen addressed the Consulting Alliance, a prestigious group of consultants in Albany, NY, on September 13th.

The writer is founder of a message strategy, speaking coaching and media relations firm. He also is a seasoned on-camera and voiceover talent.

An impromtu survey of my College of St. Rose class revealed young people felt Facebook was past its prime. Seems the teen research backs it up. A Pew study released in May on social media showed teens feel a “waning enthusiasm for Facebook.” Too many adults are on it, especially their parents, for their liking and they seek to avoid the “stressful drama.” Even Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg admits they are not trying to be cool. Most young people still remain on Facebook, but Twitter and Instagram are viewed as much hotter commodities.

Note the irony. Facebook started out as a hip, new way for college students to communicate. But teen Twitter use jumped 50% from 2011 to 2013, according to the Pew study.

Young people have always wanted their own space so Facebook’s success attracting their parents has been a turnoff. That’s not necessarily a bad thing for Facebook. Their parents have a lot more money than their kids and Facebook advertisers would like to get a chuck of it.

The generation gap is also about habits. Adults may wait to late evening to catch up on Facebook. The young are texting all day long. “Catching up” is measured in minutes.

So while the pace of technology is burning up, take some comfort in knowing some things never change — teens don’t like hanging out with their parents.

The writer is an adjunct media professor and runs a communications and speaking coaching business.

Freedom of the press got tested in New York State this week…and it won.

By just one vote.

The state’s top court ruled, in a 4-3 vote, Fox News reporter Jana Winter cannot be compelled to give up the names of her anonymous sources to a Colorado court that is demanding she do so.

The Consequence:
The ruling means anyone in New York who witnesses something they think is wrong can have more confidence their confidentiality will be protected if they leak the story to a reporter.

The Background:
The Holmes v. Winter NY State Court of Appeals case involves accused mass murderer James Holmes and the Aurora movie theater shootings, and Winter. Winter broke a story about a notebook Holmes allegedly sent to a University of Colorado psychiatrist that was reportedly “full of details about how he was going to kill people.” Winter cited two unidentified “law enforcement sources” even though a Colorado judge had placed a gag order on the investigation. Holmes’ attorneys claim the release of the sources’ names was required for a fair trial.

Since Winter works for Fox News in New York City, she claims New York State’s shield law protects her from the Colorado court’s ruling. Two lower New York courts agreed with Colorado, but the state’s top court sided with Winter.

NY’s Free Press Tradition:
New York State’s free press tradition is among the strongest in the world. In 1734, New York publisher John Peter Zenger was jailed for criticizing the colonial Governor and refusing to reveal his sources. After spending eight months in prison, a jury refused to convict him. This landmark case laid the foundation for the federal Bill of Rights’ First Amendment that was ratified nearly 60 years later. The state’s constitution has a free press provision (Article One, Section 8) broader than the one contained in the Bill of Rights.

Shield Laws:
Shield laws, designed to protect journalists from revealing sources, vary greatly from state to state. Colorado’s law is less protective than New York. In NY’s ruling this week, the Dissenting Opinion (there were three “no” votes) stated since the reporter’s privileged communication took place in Colorado, the NY Shield law “does not apply.” Fortunately, the Majority rejected that contention. Would it be sound law to suggest a face-to-face communication would not be protected but a phone call or text to a reporter in NY would be? The Dissent failed to recognize the borderless nature of news gathering, especially in the Internet age.

The state’s top court Majority stated there is “no principle more fundamental or well established than the right of a reporter to refuse to divulge a confidential source.”

Conclusion:
Reporters have gone to jail to protect their sources. This occurred as recently as 2005 (Judith Miller at the NY Times). Why? Because they know if they are forced to reveal their anonymous sources, they won’t get any more of them. And their readers, viewers and listeners will not get the information that those sources produce.

On this issue at least, New York remains the Empire State.

The writer is a former TV news anchor/reporter, current radio host and adjunct media professor.