Banksy blunder - The benefit of hindsight

Banksy elephantIt’s not quite as bad as being the man who failed to sign the Beatles but sometimes, as I crawl to work through Bristol traffic on a dismal Monday morning, it feels that way.

In the late 90s, I began to notice funny and subversive graffiti emerging around the city.  A rat here, a clown there, a thought-provoking stencilled slogan amid a scrabble of tags.

One particularly striking image appeared overnight on the side of a pub next to our old office on Hotwells Road opposite the SS Great Britain.  It was of a screaming clown with Kiss-style eye make-up, toting two pistols.  For some unaccountable reason it cheered me up every time I saw it.

While talking one day with a pal who owned a skateboard store off Park Street, I learned that the artist responsible was known as Banksy.  I filed the information away and continued to enjoy his work as it cropped up throughout Bristol, experiencing a kind of old school ‘I Spy’ thrill every time I found one.

Fast forward to 2000, and the announcement that Banksy was making the move towards the more traditional medium of canvas, and marking this with an exhibition at the Severnshed restaurant. I went along.  Although many of the paintings bore red ‘sold’ stickers (prices were in the high hundreds, rather than today’s astronomical figures) the event itself, it seemed to me, was sparsely attended.

I met and chatted with Banksy’s then manager Robert Birse, in the course of which I was invited to visit the man’s studio, which I jumped at.

If memory serves, the near-derelict space was tucked away in Bedminster.  I’d persuaded my news editor that there was something very interesting going on here, although the Banksy phenomenon was still a long way off.

During the course of the visit, I enthused as was shown various canvasses, including one particularly strong image – an elephant with a missile strapped to its back, against a vivid pink background.

“The frame on that one is slightly off,” said Robert.  “If you hold it up you’ll see it’s a bit skew-iff.”

It was.  It meant it wouldn’t hang completely flat.  “Still amazing though,” I replied.

Robert thought for a moment and then said:  “Well, you could have that one for a reduced rate, if you like.”

“So … how much?”

“Say £300?”

Now, at the time I was a pretty hard-up reporter with three children to support and another on the way.  Three hundred quid bought a lot of nappies and Wet Wipes. But still …

“Yes,” I said.  “But is it OK if I give you a cheque for £100 now and pay the rest over the next couple of months?”

He agreed, and I loaded the piece into the back of my battered Peugeot 205.

Back at the office, I phoned my wife and – having spent the journey back planning the best way of pitching the purchase (investment/it’s beautiful/it’ll cover that dodgy bit of plastering in the front room) – recounted the tale.

An ominous silence.  A reaaaalllllllly long, ominous silence.  Then:  “You know we can’t afford it, so I don’t even know why you’d consider this.  It’ll have to go back.  And you need to get the bloke to tear up the cheque before he banks it.”

The channel for negotiation had clanged shut.  I muttered something about a loan, or perhaps borrowing some money from a parent or a mate, but we were already overdrawn to the hilt, and this was met with a dangerous snort.

So back it went.

I’ve tried to “take a positive” from this over the years, but I can’t. I experience a pang – actually it’s more of a stab – every time I read about a Banksy selling at auction, or something like the wonderful Dismaland opening its rusty doors to the public.

If there’s anything I learned from my own very personal Banksygate it’s this.  If you love a piece of art for what you believe it to be – something you love – then buy it, if you reasonably can.  Absurd as it sounds now, I genuinely didn’t have the spending power at the time, but I guess I could have rustled up the cash somehow.

The other thing I take comfort and joy from is that I can still see and enjoy Banksys every day, in the streets here in Bristol.  He even painted a commemorative flower over the trigger-happy clown on Hotwells Road, which always raises a smile.  I see them every day, and they’re free.


Apple's Swift response to Taylor provides mutually beneficial PR

Image: FashionStock.com / Shutterstock.com
Image: FashionStock.com / Shutterstock.com

Yesterday, in an unexpected turn of events, Apple caved after receiving a bold request relating to its new franchise, Apple music.  The most successful and valuable company on the planet submitted to an open letter from a 25 year old ex-country singer from Reading, Pennsylvania.  But Taylor Swift isn’t any 25 year old.  With over 100 million followers on social media, a back catalogue of annoyingly catchy tunes and millions of YouTube views, Taylor Swift had the power to go head to head with the $700 billion company with the support of other artists.

Swift’s open letter on Tumblr requested that Apple do a U-turn on their decision to not provide artists with any royalties from the first three months of the new Apple Music streaming service.  Apple responded via social media within a matter of hours agreeing with Swifts stance and undergoing a complete U-turn on their original trial period policy.

Three things strike me about this story.  First how quickly Apple responded; second that they gave into the request, and third how much decent exposure (sorry to steal 72Point's marketing slogan here) this has given both parties involved.

Firstly, let’s look at the speed of the response. I truly believe this is the key to what has ultimately led to such good public relations for both Swift and Apple. The rapidity of the response shows a total commitment from Apple to get things right and to emphasise the fact they want to be on the side of the artists from day one.  It’s a shame they didn’t make this decision initially, but I don’t think going from bad cop to good cop has harmed their latest venture. In fact I think it’s done them every bit of good.

Perhaps the response was quick because Apple was already expecting it. Also, there’s a case to be made that Swift’s record label (Big Machine Records) may have been a driving force, as contractually, record labels generally have at least some power over what artists can do. The cynical side of me thinks that this publicised agreement could have been a pre-planned way for Apple to publicise Apple music, especially because Swift has previously indicated that she’s not keen on streaming, making her the perfect candidate to make this story viral.

Similarly with Swift, had this episode drawn out over a few weeks, we may have forgotten all about the fact it was her that complained in the first place (further promoting the idea that it's one big PR stunt). However, the pixels on news sites had only just loaded onto our iPads and iPhones with the news that Swift had taken Apple on,when almost immediately, Apple had backed down. Swift went from being a manufactured pop star to a guardian of the music industry in a matter of hours, with her partner Calvin Harris and other artists showing their support across social media.

Secondly, Apple backed down without any sign of a struggle.  Apple are famous for holding firm with their commercial decisions, especially in the early days of digital music, as they were offering music artists a new way to sell their music to millions of people across the world.  Apple created a digital space that artists weren’t ready for. The late Steve Jobs knew this and didn’t buckle for requests to increase the cost per song on iTunes.

Fast forward to 2015 and here we have a music streaming market that is competitive, established, and where artists are starting to flex their muscle to protect themselves financially.  Apple is new to the game, and they appear to understand just how important it is to come across fair and on the artist’s side.  So whereas in the early days Jobs could put his foot down and that was that, now it’s the turn of the artist to regain some power within the changing face of the music industry.

Lastly, let's discuss image. After all as we’re a PR company so we should probably talk about PR.  Apple historically has sold products, with the obvious exception of music or films on iTunes. Because of that, they can control our experience and attitudes towards those products.  In the music streaming business, this is the first true service that Apple will be proving to millions of people.  We’ll be paying a monthly subscription in return for music and an experience with Connect and Beats 1.

Apple knows that it's vital that they start Apple Music with the right footing. The saying “you only get one chance to make a first impression” really rings true here.  Apple knew this was their chance to project a positive, collaborative, respectful and caring image onto Apple Music. They grabbed it with both hands.  Sometimes in business you can under promise and over deliver. Apple hasn’t over delivered here, but they have certainly projected an image of being understanding and on the artist’s sides.

As for Taylor Swift, we can’t underestimate how huge the impact of this coverage has made to her current image and her future career within the music industry.  Not only her image towards fans and the general music loving public, but her music peers and other influential figures within the industry.  The biggest news story I’ve seen to date on Taylor Swift was her dating Harry Styles (among others), so I find it noteworthy that she is now achieving column inches by taking on (and beating) the most valuable company in the world.

Swift put her neck (and possibly reputation) on the line to go head-to-head with Apple. Particularly risky bearing in mind how stubborn Apple can be when meeting opposition over their business decisions.

However, she has come out on top and many in the industry are calling her a shrewd businesswoman after this episode.  Already recently named in the Forbes power women list, I’m sure she’ll be moving up the charts in more ways than one after this victory.


Lack of Female Role Models for Girls in the Media

poserIt’s painful just how hugely teenage girls obsess over beautiful celebs, isn’t it?

Even more painful is remembering being exactly the same way.

As an awkward pre-teen, the waist of my trousers still that bit too high, I directed all my adolescent envy towards two TV babes:  Holly Valance (Neighbours fan – weren’t we all) and Frankie, of the highly-regarded eight-piece ensemble, the S Club Juniors. Pause for emphasis.

They were older than me; I guess around 14 - slim, clear-skinned and so unbearably good-looking.

Call me a shallow kid but if someone had said to me, ‘What do you want in life?’ I’d have thought, ‘Flick Scully’s complexion’ without pausing. I didn’t know what else to put my energy towards. School?

Perhaps it was a blessing then, that my only exposure to these girls was through music videos, CBBC and my monthly Sugar mag, so I was only mildly hateful of myself. Imagining what my life would have been like if I were 11 years old today….to endure the social media noise that teenagers have now… well that’s too stressful to think about.

It’s likely I’d be drip-fed a continuous stream of Holly and Frankie through their Twitter feeds; lapping it up as they churned out duck-faced selfies, holiday pics strewn with product placement, bikini mirror shots - at a Kardashian regularity. In a misplaced brainwave I’d probably have uploaded a ‘vlog’ of myself re-enacting a Fast Show sketch with a toy panda or something, which, years later, I would almost kill myself trying to remove. I might have even… enjoyed Zoella.  It’s frightening, what might have been.

Imagining what my life would have been like if I were 11 years old today….to endure the social media noise that teenagers have now… well that’s too stressful to think about.

But the next generation – the millennials (apparently I might be a millennial, a fact I’d rather hide away from)- live each day in this media frenzy, which is barely being contained. We’re only beginning to see the dark side developing from this parallel world - the Instagram culture, the trolling, cyber bullying, revenge porn – and what an obsession with narcissistic, selfie-addicted reality stars might do to a teenager’s sense of self.

The problem lies in the fact that the really cool women – the explorers, zoologists, scientists, entrepreneurs, are NOWHERE to be seen. And the Kardashians, the Jenners, the cast of Towie - who are solely famous for publicity and looks, are EVERYWHERE. They aren’t particularly admirable, aren’t representing a viable career move and are spreading their own message of ‘you don’t look good enough’ to their young fans like a disease.

It’s mostly ‘the Kylie Jenner effect’ (the influx of girls getting lip fillers due to her sudden enormous pout) that made me write this post, as it got me thinking about idols. Aside from their own family members, not to be downplayed, and a stock list of historical figures like Marie Curie that are churned out in school, there are just reams and reams of glitzy celebs. Throw in a Karen Brady, a Michelle Obama and a Mary Portas and that’s it, really.

A space-travelling woman going to Mars may be mentioned in the news one day, or an athlete on another day, or a CEO on another And then she fades into obscurity as a ‘What has she done to her face?!’ story dominates the air time for weeks.

Put simply, there is no PR for the real idols girls need.  No scientists, world explorers, chemists, psychologists. No web designers, charity workers, astronauts or business owners. And if we, as adults, don’t know anything about the women making real changes in the world but constantly seeing Kim Kardashian’s blonde mop gets a news headline, no wonder girls are chasing their goals right into the cosmetic surgeon’s office instead.

There is no PR for the real idols girls need

I want to hear about women that are worth looking up to and emulating, who have made something of themselves based on more than their cheekbones. Who have seen a problem and looked to solve it, through hard graft and innovation.

And we should research them, and talk about them, and share them, and give them the PR they deserve – but also (cue the Miss. World bit) because it’s what young girls deserve. The scope of what women are achieving isn’t bleak; they’re just humble enough not to be yelling about it. It’s up to everyone else to yell about them instead. It’s up to us change the situation.

 International Women's Day is the 8th March. Don't forget to join the conversation using #IWD2015


Eschew All Those Beastly Adjectives

Roald Dahl letterSorting through a chest of old letters and photos recently, I came across a yellowing envelope marked ‘Roald Dahl’.

Memories flooded back as I opened it.  This was a hand-typed reply I’d received from the great story-teller to a letter I wrote to him when I was 17, pleading for feedback and advice on an A level project I was doing about short stories.  I’d included one of my own.

I remember how I felt when he replied – astounded, and then, with the callowness of youth (see pic!), a bit peeved that he’d been so terse:

Dear Jay,
You are asking too much of me.  You must realise that I get an awful lot of these letters and you can’t expect me to write your thesis for you.  It should be fairly obvious to you what the role of the short story is in modern literature.  It’s a big one.  Study particularly the American short story writers like O’Henry and Runyon and Hawthorne and Poe, and lots and lots of English ones.
If you want any dope on me there have been an awful lot of profiles in English magazines over the past year starting with the February 1979 issue of Vogue.
I have read your story.  I don’t think it’s bad, but you must stop using too many adjectives.  Study Hemingway, particularly his early work and learn how to write short sentences and how to eschew all those beastly adjectives.  Surely it is better to say “She was a tall girl with a bosom” than “She was a tall girl with a shapely, prominent bosom”, or some such rubbish.  The first one says it all.
Yours sincerely,
Roald Dahl

Heeding his 35-year-old advice, I tweeted a snap of the letter with the message: “In 1980, as a spotty teenager, I wrote to Roald Dahl asking for advice on writing. Here is his priceless response”.  Yes, I know that contains two “beastly” adjectives, but I felt they were justified.

A week later, and with no additional ‘push’ from me, the post had been retweeted over 1,000 times and favourited by more than 1,500 people, making it my most popular tweet by a country mile.

Roald Dahl social sharesObviously its popularity could be attributed to Dahl himself; his books are a part of so many of our lives.  But for teachers and writers (and so many of the retweets have been by them) what resonates is the advice, specifically that passed on so memorably in the final three sentences.  It sank into my teenage brain and led to a mantra when I worked as a reporter and then in PR: ‘keep it tight’, whether it be an intro or a pitch to a news editor.

I remember a team of in-house PRs coming into the SWNS newsroom many years ago to see their story being pitched to national newspapers news editors one morning.  The PR director and two wide-eyed interns (I think they were from a rail group) watched as I made the call to desk after desk with the same 10-second spiel:  ”Oh yeah, and we’ve got a fun one – a list of the weirdest items left behind at train stations this year, including a wooden leg, a stuffed gerbil and a jar of pickled eggs.  With pix.”  After the call, the PRs were mortified.  ”You didn’t even mention the name! Or how many stations were included in the round-up! Or how amazing some of the things were!”

Of course, that wasn’t the point.  It was about the story, and you’ve got about 10 seconds to tell it to a busy news editor.  These people deal every day with the absolute extremes of story-telling – terrible human tragedies, major sporting achievements, business disasters – so to oversell or ‘overtell’ our/your survey would show we had no understanding of the way it goes.  The mention of the client in the pitch would have been a switch-off.  And to have called the results of the survey “amazing” would just have been beastly.