Just back from the first day of Ecobuild 2010, and a fantastic day meeting old friends, colleagues, journalists and many clients past and present.

The show, billed as "the biggest event in the world for sustainable design, construction and the built environment", is definitely one of the highlights of our year, and a fruitful source of ideas for this blog.

There is much I could explore in terms of the exhibition this year (many more products, lots more greenwash), or the marketing strategies on display (including some interesting examples of how not to promote your organisation at an event like this), but for now let me just tell you about a short debate I sat in on this afternoon in the Arena, on the issue of the media's role in promoting sustainability.

The panel was Eve Pollard (former tabloid editor), Alastair McGowan (impressionist, TV star and environmental campaigner) and Peter Bazalgette (of Endemol/Big Brother fame). They were chaired by the ever-sceptical Andrew Neil who revelled in his role as devil's advocate.

The debate confirmed my suspicion that the last people on earth you should ask about communicating sustainability are a bunch of media celebs:

• Andrew Neil focused heavily on Climategate and other examples of eco mis-selling as justification for unlimited cynicism,
• Alastair McGowan sadly failed to counter any of this, instead complaining that the media don't get behind sustainability as much as they should because of "fear of facing our mortality",
• Eve Pollard launched her big idea that Ecobuild exhibitors should all be marketing their products to women via glossy consumer mags because "women are inherently sustainable",
• and Peter Bazalgette insisted that the media's role was to question and interrogate any use of the word 'sustainable' and we should not expect the media to 'promote' anything.

My view? Well, yes I did take the opportunity to rant back at the panel, I admit. 

They all had some interesting points, especially about the damage that is done by greenwash.

But my view was that we should all be a lot more positive. While they were sitting around debating whether green was good and whether the media should or could get involved, the rest of us were getting on with it.

Hardly a day goes by without me seeing a new 'green living', 'green building' or 'green business' column in a paper, feature in a magazine or programme on TV or radio. Most parts of the media are very interested in examples of environmental sustainability, especially when it touches our day-to-day lives.

Journalists are often just as excited as we are by the sorts of innovations we saw at Ecobuild. They are not tuning out to ponder their mortality. They are not dismissing genuine news stories out of world-weary cynicism. They are open to ideas and examples of sustainability in practice - and I for one was very proud of the efforts and achievements of the many people I saw at Ecobuild who were marketing and promoting their work to the media with real flair and enthusiasm.

I was asked by an editor to give some thought to what makes for good marketing and business in the face of another year of hardship in the building and construction industry. So below are my 5 Tell-Tale Signs of what, in my humble opinion and my experience of two severe industry recessions, mark out the winners from the losers.

You can also read our 'Seven Day Plan' (top tips for a week's worth of things companies can do to improve their marketing and communications) in today's TTJ magazine - see page 22.

What would you add to this list? Please do drop me a comment below.

1.  Winners invest in relationships
… and they invest in the people who forge these relationships. They listen closely to the sales team and front line staff, and are passionate about little things that make a big difference.  They find time for real conversations. 

2.  Winners wear their customers’ socks
They keep looking outwards, eyes firmly on the horizon.  They actually know more about their customers’ businesses than they know about their competitors (never the other way around). They prioritise market research and market intelligence, have a powerful contacts database or CRM system, and they could make spookily well-informed guesses about the issues that will be discussed at their customers’ next Board meetings.  They sell solutions, not materials with a mark-up.

3.  Winners don’t let the stress show
In recessions, customers need a lot of reassurance.  Winners always stay true to their corporate values and keep communicating.  They remain easy to do business with. They are seen to treat people well.  They pay on time. They bring their best suppliers much closer to the business so that people are more willing to go that extra mile for them.  Word soon gets out that this is a confident company that you want on your side in rocky times.

4.  Winners keep their heads above the parapet
A big part of building confidence is about maintaining visibility – particularly through cost-effective tools like PR, awards, networking events, online communications and social media.  They don’t spend loads but are highly targeted and focused and they integrate all these marketing activities very tightly together so they squeeze out every ounce of value.

5.  Winners just get on with it
Recessions don’t last forever – this time next year the market will be entirely different, and to be honest the most successful clients we are working with today have been vigorously lobbying, meeting journalists, manoeuvring into position and shaping that market since last January. They are much more likely to say “we never waste a good crisis” than “let’s put that on hold until we see what happens after the election”.

This was the title of my 10 minute slot at last week's B2Camp event at the Working Buildings expo at Olympia.

It won't surprise many of you to know that we are using social media tools, particularly Twitter, as part of our PR and media relations work for clients as well as building awareness of the consultancy itself.

So I thought it might be of interest to post my slides here, with a commentary (as the slides themselves won't give you the detail of what was discussed). You can also see copies of the other presentations on the B2Camp ning site.

In a later post, I will also let you have a list of our top 10 journalists that we think you should follow if you're interested in architecture, construction, building, engineering and sustainability in the built environment.

My first point was that Twitter can be seen as a huge, packed party. Full of people you probably don't know, but who are friendly, happy to chat and will happily introduce you to others you'd like to meet. The noise is almost deafening and like all good parties, a lot of tripe is being spoken...

But in this party you will find lots of journalists, many of whom are interested in what you're interested in.

Research due to be launched in the States next month suggests that 70% of US journalists use social media networks to help them with their reporting, up from 41% last year. About half of all the respondents said they use Twitter. (Read the full report on the Journalistics blog here).

Although the figures are not so high in the UK yet (see this interesting research on Twitter use in UK national newspapers), the trend seems to be towards greater use of Twitter by the media when they want to find sources, research stories and post feature requests.

In fact, at first glance Twitter seems to be a party with an A-list of media celebrities in attendance: the editors of Building magazine, The Architect's Journal, Building Design, New Civil Engineer and Construction News... they're all here!

Of course, not all these journalists and editors use Twitter to its full extent. Some don't even like it.

But thanks to those that do, there's an interesting opportunity opening up which allows companies, their PR professionals and journalists to share information, help each other and build closer working relationships.

How it works

Here's a quick snapshot of how it can work at its simplest level.

First, you need to know where to find journalists on Twitter.

There are several generic directories which might be of use:

• Twellow
• WeFollow
• JustTweetIt

There are also some useful wikis collecting information on the media on Twitter:

• MediaOnTwitter
• Muckrack
• JournalistTweets

But as you can see above, our main recommendations are to check out media websites, delve into the list of people a few journalists are following (you can bet they're following other reporters too), and also your PR company's contacts.

My proposal to the B2Campers was that we should set up our own wiki for media contacts relevant to our sector. (Want to help? Please contact me or Paul Wilkinson).

You should choose a few relevant journalists to follow on Twitter, but don't necessaily expect them to follow you back straight away. You will need need to prove your worth as a source first - and that may be best done offline in the first instance. (More about that in a later blog post).

Listening in on a journalist's Twitter feed can tell you much more about what they're interested in, and the things they like/dislike. You can also spot any requests for information - responding to these opportunities has created coverage for our clients in the Times newspaper and many online channels in the last month alone.

Keep an eye out too for the hashtag #journorequest - this is increasingly used by freelance journalists to tag tweets when they're looking for help and information.

If there are journalists following you on Twitter, you may find it useful to post updates with links direct to your press releases (created as pages on your website, full of links to useful information, images etc. rather than a downloaded PDF - see some examples above). There are different ways to do this, but my best advice is to make the tweet itself interesting rather than posting an update that says "Just uploaded an interesting press release http://blahblah". Do not bombard the journalists with messages telling them to click on your stories!

Because: HERE'S THE WORD OF WARNING!

A quick search on the hashtag #PRFAIL reveals a litany of complaints from beleaguered journalists who have received poor service from companies and their PR representatives. Any bad practice will be broadcast on Twitter, you can count on it.

Our advice? Be professional, know what you're doing, and follow the CIPR guidelines on social media.

So in conclusion...

My final thoughts at the Olympia event are summed up in these last two slides.

This one was a tweet I stumbled upon from @Ahaley, someone I don't know or follow, but someone who has summed it all up perfectly:

Yep, that's it in a 140-character nutshell.

It doesn't matter what media you are using, the usual rules of PR still apply - PR is not about broadcasting your news at anyone in the near vicinity, it's all about relationships.

And good, strong, loving relationships are built upon some age-old rules...

I think those bullet points are probably pretty self-explanatory, but if you have any questions please just ask!

There was an interesting discussion following my presentation into the whole issue of how we can evaluate 'social media coverage' (if there is such a thing) in our PR evaluation for clients. I do believe that it should be included as evidence of the value we can add, but the evaluation tools available today are pretty poor.

Although, as I pointed out last week, the whole Web 2.0 environment is changing and developing in sophistication so fast... maybe I shall have lots to present on at the next B2Camp.

A recent phone call to my office prompted me to do some digging for Footings.

The style of the call might be familiar to you if you work for a trade association or membership organisation of any sort, and particularly if you're part of the construction industry. We get these calls about once a month:

"Hi, how are you?! [Gushing enthusiasm from stranger on phone].

"I've been talking to your colleague Jim and he really wanted me to give you a call. We publish a very high quality journal that goes to all the key decision makers in the construction industry and my editor really wants to run a big feature on your Association. What issues are of most concern to you at the moment? Zero carbon agenda? Building Regulations? Health and safety must be a big one.... [Blah, blah]

"Well, we can offer you a full page/two pages/six pages of free editorial.... No cost to your Association, but great coverage in a glossy quarterly that's read by 40,000 senior decision makers - all the top specifiers, housebuilders, RSLs, housing associations, local authorities, major contractors, special sub-contractors, architects, QSs, surveyors, structural, mechanical and civil engineers, government agencies, public utilities, materials manufacturers...." [Blah, blah]

If you're anything like me, major alarm bells are ringing by now.

• I've never heard of this publication before (it has one of those generic titles like UK Construction World, Building National, Property Now etc).
• I've never heard of the publisher either.
• It's claiming a circulation well in excess of what we'd expect, covering pretty much the WHOLE industry and all its diverse disciplines.
• It's not got an ABC certificate of course.
• Oh, and guess what, they want to promote the fact that you're "collaborating" with them on this "exciting feature" to all the Association's members in order to invite them to advertise. They may even want a list of your members in exchange for this "great opportunity".

Welcome to the trade mag version of vanity publishing, and its close cousin 'support advertising' features.

Fed up with these calls and curious about what was going on with this particular rogue publication (which has recently changed its title again), last week I had a really helpful chat with a bone fide publisher who knew the set-up. He explained that these tactics tend to cluster around three types of features:

1. Project features about a particular building project, where the developer writes some blurb about the project and all the companies, contractors and suppliers involved on the project are invited to place advertising saying how pleased they are to be associated with Building X and its developer.
2. Event features about a major exhibition like Interbuild, Ecobuild or a conference, where the event organiser writes the blurb and all the exhibitors are approached to advertise in support.
3. Trade association/membership organisation features, where the Association writes some blurb and all the members are encouraged to advertise in support.

You get the picture.

As a publishing model, it can occasionally work well for all parties, he told me. Sometimes.

BUT there are major dangers:

• If the sales team can't sell enough advertising around the feature, it won't get published at all, so you've wasted your time.
• There is usually very little information about who receives these publications, and readership numbers are not the same as actual copies distributed (assume a standard multiplier of x 4).
• The quality of the content can be shockingly bad.
• The ad sales techniques can get very pushy, which is also bad news if the Association then receives complaints from its members. They may feel obligated or bullied into advertising in a magazine where they would or should not spend their money.
• And there are (allegedly) cases where a publisher has simply taken the advertising revenue, published enough copies of the magazine to give one to each of the advertisers, and pocketed the rest of the cash. Illegal, immoral and pretty much invisible fraud.

I'm afraid our sector has its fair share of these sorts of publishers. If you call me, I'll give you the names of our prime suspects.

So here's the bottom line: No up-to-date ABC certificate, no editorial and certainly no list of our clients' members. Sorry.

Here's another in our quick series trying to debunk a few PR myths and misunderstandings.

This is a true story - a comment I received some time ago from a new client:

"I don't understand. I gave the journalist all the information I could - our brochure, annual report, even a copy of the presentation I gave at that conference last month - and they still got it wrong!"

The moral of the story? Less is more.

Information overload is a sure fire way to confuse (or simply turn off) a busy journalist under deadline. If the reporter has to struggle to find your point of view in a swathe of corporate literature, or sift through a 900-word email to get the facts and simple three-line quote that's needed, then you cannot expect them to write a good article that accurately reflects the facts and your views - or even to write one at all.

It's much better to find out exactly what they need and for you to supply it succinctly, efficiently and professionally.

They need an article or opinion piece? Fine, that probably means 600-800 words or so and a picture. They need to know what you thought about that Government announcement this morning? That probably means two or three short sentences max in a quick email (or better still, over the phone right now).

By all means put annual reports, brochures, presentations, previous press cuttings and a rich source of additional information onto your website (for example, within your News Centre) and offer links to it. But a parcel of your finest colour brochures will never be a suitable substitute for getting straight to the point.