i told you so

Back in January I wrote about Stephane Dion's appointment of a sitting (recently elected) NDP MLA as the Liberal candidate in a northern Saskatchewan riding. The by-election for that riding took place yesterday.

Well to Mr. Dion's and Ms. Beatty's surprise, but not to mine, Ms. Beatty lost. It appears having a candidate dropped in from another party with no open nomination process encourages people to stay home. I suspect, and it has been widely discussed, that a lot of Liberals upset at the process stayed home this election figuring out whoever was elected wasn't going to be around for long.

Here's some of the coverage of the by-election results:

CBC Saskatchewan
Globe and Mail
UPDATED: New Globe and Mail Story

As for Ms. Beatty, it appears she has the right idea. Stick around, fight a nomination battle if she has too, and run again whenever the Liberals finally stand up and vote rather than sit and abstain. There's a good chance that spending the next several months campaigning and showing people that she's willing to make a commitment to running federally may be what it takes to get Liberal supporters back to the polls and her into the House of Commons.

talk about being on message

It seems the US Presidential Candidates are using the same speaking notes, regardless of party:



(with apologies to Mr. Bowie)

message recieved???

Well who ever ended up telling him, Mr. Dion finally appears to have gotten the message that there's some problems with the handling of his recent appointment of a NDP MLA as a Liberal candidate here in Saskatchewan. I provided Mr. Dion with my advice down below. I don't know who else is advising him, but thank god he finally took their advice and came out talking, (although not swinging).

• CBC News: Dion Defends Beatty Appointment

step on over to the other side

I'm a little behind on the Sarah Hampson bashing although her "Merry Ex-mas" piece had me all riled up and throwing around the withering look of disapproval(tm). However, you'll be glad to know the little sister has taken up the challenge and you can read her take on Ms. Hampson's most recent piece here.

However, the withering look of disapproval has been cast at politicians lately. Today, its back to old Stephane Dion. I guess when most people in your own party don't support you, you start looking to supporters in other parties. I've blogged before about the suicide, errr mutual support pact between Dion and Elizabeth May. Mr. Dion, much like Ms. Hampson has gone and done it again.

Mr. Dion appointed a sitting NDP MLA to run in the March 17 by-election for a federal seat here in Saskatchewan. Yes, one of those MLA's who was just re-elected two months' ago. Yes, she's quitting provincial politics two-months later and is aiming for the big show.

According to press reports, it appears Ms. Beatty got used to being in cabinet, and doesn't like the view from the opposition benches in Regina. So she's swapping/shopping for a view from the opposition benches in Ottawa in hopes she'll be back on the government side quicker than the at least four years she'll have to wait here. Hmmm, a guess a promise of a cabinet post was made, however really, who are we kidding, if you're a liberal and elected in the west, you're pretty much guaranteed a cabinet post

You think considering that they started talking about this six months ago (yes before the Sask election) she would have come up with a better message, but I'll give her points for being honest about the reason, although she certainly was not honest with the electorate about her intentions.

As for the Liberals, when will they learn. Yes I understand Stephan Dion has made a commitment to get more women in his caucus, but are there no liberal women? If there are, I certainly can't imagine them sticking around (i.e. Belinda) with Mr. Dion seeming to only find women he likes in other parties. Maybe Lizzie and Joan can sit together once they're both elected (tee hee, that's funny, Elizabeth May elected, tee hee).

Also, once again, knowing this was in the works for months, don't you think the Liberals could have planned their communications a little better? "Stephane Dion has made it a priority to elect more women; Stephane Dion thinks this is a great candidate." Are you thinking Stephane Dion now talks about himself in the third persion? (Glen thinks that would be swell!) Fear not no, Mr. Dion, who was so committed to this candidate and trashing the democratic nomination process, was not available for comment and a liberal senator (and former national campaign chair) was trotted out to do all the talking. It's time to whip out PR101 again.

First off, if Mr. Dion was so committed, make him available. Have him stand up, accept and explain his decisions. Don't trot someone else out to do it for him. The Conservatives are trashing him as a weak leader, and when he makes a "bold" leadership decision, trot him out to show and defend it. Don't send out a senator who use quotes like "bite the bullet" when describing the decision.

If you are committed to this decision, be proud. Don't say you "bit the bullet". Have Stephan Dion say "I made a commitment to change the representation of women in our party, and when required I'll make unpopular decisions to keep that commitment. That's what a leader does."

"Yes, Ms. Beatty is a New Democrat MLA, but she is a smart, talented aboriginal woman whose voice and ideas need to be heard in Parliament. I'm pleased she feels like the Liberal Party is the best party to hear her voice and help address the needs of aboriginal people and all Canadians. Her joining with us reflects her commitment to helping her constituents and reflects the change I have brought to the Liberal Party."

That's just one suggestion of what could be said. I'm sure there's others. But all of them are better than saying "Ow, we bit the bullet." So for that, and just cherry picking generally, Senator David Smith and Stephane Dion get the withering look of disapproval(tm). And Ms. Beatty gets one of her own, for being less than forthright with her constituents.

separating the wheat from the chaff

Well they've only been in power for a couple of weeks now, and the Sask Party is not off to a great start. When they should be focusing on their key campaign promises and the big issues, Saskatchewan's New Government (sound familiar?) decided to turf the province's 30 year old logo, a stylized wheat sheaf.

Now, in their own defence, I wasn't able to write about this quick enough, as the Saskatchewan's New Government has, with tail between their legs, turned around from this position already. Public outrage over changing the logo, their lack of any sense of priority, and the cost of such of a move has made them change their mind. Not only did they change their mind, they announced it twice, releasing two news releases only hours apart changing the wording between the first and the second.

None of the current SaskParty Cabinet members have any experience in government and it is already beginning to show. I know it will take some time for them to get up to speed, but their lack of political savvy is alarming. The SaskParty railed against the NDP's decision to rebrand the Saskatchewan wordmark as Saskatchewan!. They argued it wasn't necessary, it was too much money, government should be spending money on more important things. However, as soon as they are in power they arbitrarily declare the wheat sheaf persona non grata and replace it with the Government crest, announcing they will go through a costly process of developing a new logo.

Speculation is that they are not happy having a logo created by an NDP government, that has been in use during a period dominated by NDP politics. However, there were conservative governments during that period.

Sending out two press releases changing the words in a quote from one to the other is not acceptable. The story as it was in today's local paper was about the retreat and the fact that they sent out two press releases saying two different things.

This is bad public relations skills. You can one shot at trying to explain a mistake or backpedal so you better get it right. Make sure that you can live with every word in your news release. If you can't don't send it out until you get it right. If you get it wrong, own up to it, don't try to pass it off in another news release. The Deputy Premier should have got on the phones and worked new quotes directly with the press rather than try to pass off another news release.

Hopefully the SaskParty is staffing up with some skilled politically savvy people otherwise they could be in for a long and bumpy ride.

the face of an organization

Okay, for today's entry you will need to read a couple of posts from the little sister's blog. I know most of you are regular readers of her blog, but just in place, read these posts:

Post One
Post Two

Alright, you've read them, good. Now here's my two cents.

I would agree that a broad sweeping policy that would apply to all employees of the CBC was ridiculous and I'm glad they changed it. I'm still not sure that they have it right, but it's getting closer. However, from my background in PR, I will fully defend CBC's decision to try to bring in some control.

The CBC like all other media has moved from simply a team of reporters to a mix of reporters, columnists, and personalities. It used to be reporters would report the news and hosts would read the news. Now, reporters interview other reporters, opinions are regularly given, and reporters (and I know many will disagree) put their own 'spin' on the story. The CBC heavily markets their lead reporters and columnists. We constantly see their faces in commercials, and have come to associate them with the CBC.

Now if some of these "stars" of the CBC were to have their own blogs, people would not make the distinction between the views and opinions they hold as individuals, and the views and opinions they offer on the CBC. It's fair for the CBC to want to protect their reputation from comments made by employees that people won't distinguish as not being from the CBC.

I would hold official "spokespeople" to the same standard. For several organizations, I was the main spokesperson as the face of the organization. I was always very cautious when I was "out and about" not to throw around my views recognizing that people may not make the distinction between my view and the organization's view.

The joy right now is that I don't represent any one organization, so I'm free to say what I want on my blog without a disclaimer.

it's not easy bein' green

Elizabeth May, the leader of the federal Green Party of Canada came to the little law school on the prairie today. I went to hear her speak.

Given that she was speaking at the LLSOTP, her talk was mainly about the Kyoto Protocol as an instrument of the law. Ms. May is a lawyer by training, and had some good one-liners about lawyers, and the talk was quite interesting. All of the question period was focused on Kyoto, climate change, and environmental issues.

I think the Green Party may actually have some interesting ideas, but I don't know how they will ever get past being painted as a single-issue party. Yes recent polls have shown that the environment is the new "health care" when it comes to issues, but even if it is the "most important" issue to Canadians, I still don't see a single-issue party being elected in large numbers.

They appear to have a fairly broad program, and I understand that in Europe, the Green Party is seen as more of a conservative focused party, even though here they are seen as left-wing.

Unfortunately, I don't know what they can do to get past the single-issue label. Elizabeth May seems a very smart and capable leader, but given her background with the Sierra Club, people think of her and the environment. As noted earlier, all the questions were on the environment, nothing on the rest of the platform.

I notice on the Green Party web site they are looking for a Director of Communications. In the absence of a communications director, I will offer my advice, based on today's event and from my experience as a communications advisor, in another edition of PR101:

1. Don't always speak about the environment

Yes, dance with the one who brought you, put try to frame your topics in a larger context. Talk about how the environment links to other issues, i.e. health, economy, etc. For example Canada's Green Economy.

2. If asked to speak on the environment, use the question period to introduce other elements of your program.

This is called "bridging". Today, Ms. May was asked what would the Green Party do to meet our Kyoto committments. She talked about a carbon tax. When you raise the carbon tax, use that as a bridge to talk about your economic platform. Ms. May briefly raised the issue of shifting the tax burden, but without much details. A question on GMO foods, bridge to talking about regulation of products, to health to health care. I will give some credit to Ms. May as she did do some bridging but never far enough away from the environment to redirect the conversation.

3. Provide media availability at all presentations.

I watched the news coverage on CBC and there was coverage of her talk but no interview. It's possible there is any number of reasons for this, scheduling, lack of media interest, etc, but this needs to be pushed. The current government does this a lot. Local media is an effective tool, and an interview with a federal leader will create a greater splash in a smaller media environment.

4. Plug, plug, plug.

Never forget to plug your web site. I think Ms. May did this once today, but in snappy short answers you can never cover enough material. Always refer people to your web site for more information once you have given an answer on that topic. People who are really interested will go and look.

5. Short, Snappy Answers

Ms. May's background as a lawyer, policy advisor and activist, and her extensive knowledge of these issues were all obvious today. Her answers were thorough and comprehensive. Unfortunately these answers take up too much time and don't make for good sound bites. Now don't get me wrong, there is a time and place for long answers and explanations, but it works better in smaller groups.

6. Depth, Depth, Depth

Right now the Green Party is seen as a single-issue/one-person party. Talk about the team, the party, that's there's depth to the organization. When doing local presentations, trot out some past or current candidates, riding association officials, even head of the campus club. Show that the party has an organization and depth. Show that a national team is in place. If you're only developing this national team, it's even more important to show this. Also, this provides a local face that people can follow-up with once the leader is gone.

7. Giving votes meaning

Contrary to what many people say, people don't want to throw their votes away. The Green Party needs to give people an idea of what their vote will mean if cast for them. Be realistic, don't expect to convince people you'll form a majority. But what will a vote for the Green Party mean. The NDP and Liberals are saying that a vote for the Green Party is a vote for the conservatives, because it's a vote taken away from these two parties. Don't let your opponents define you. Make clear statements about what Green Party MPs will mean for Canada. For example, how the Green Party can introduce new ideas into debates and committee proceedings; in another minority gov't the Greens could hold the balance of power and influence policy. A vote for the Green party signals a change in Canadian's priorities.

i live in a continuous state of excitement...

Ok, the title of this post would work better if I lived in one of the 50 states in the USA, but the statement "I live in a continuous province of excitement" doesn't quite have the same ring to it. But I'm told it's true, and how do I know that, well because the Government of Saskatchewan has rebranded our fine province. We are now:



Yes, that's right, get out your permanent markers, your maps, globes and atlases, and start drawing in the exclamation point. We are a province that feels it needs to put an exclamation point on its name to tell the rest of the country, and the world, just how damn exciting we are. This is no ordinary exclamation mark, let me tell you, this is a $1.5 million dollar, I'm going to be aired on the superbowl exclamation mark. Yes the Government is spending $1.5 million of our tax dollars to reinforce how exciting this province is.

But you know what is not exciting, coroner's inquests, forest fires, or west nile virus. Now some of you may be quite surprised, becuase like me, you're a little warped, and do find these things exciting. But the Saskatchewan Government is telling you this is not true. According to this CBC report, the government has told its employees not to use the exclamation point when making announcements about topics like these.

When I went to Flak U (public relations school for those not in the know), we learned about things like this. However, the one thing we were regularly told is that you have one exclamation mark to use in your career, so choose wisely. Obviously the communications brain trust in Saskatchewan did not receive the same training. This exclamation mark now appeares everywhere.

If you've read the CBC article (what you haven't yet, go back up and read it, I link to these things for a reason), you will also see that the Government has published a 29-page book of guidelines on how to use the new rebranded logo. For those reporters out there who haven't moved over to flakdom, or those not in the communications field, this is called a visual identity policy. This is the first lesson in PR101 that I offer you.

A visual identity policy is a good thing (Megan, stop yelling NOOOOOO). It sets out how, when and where to use an organization's logo, wordmark or brand identity. In the old days, this was never much of a problem as printing was quite an elaborate and expensive process and not just anyone could do it. However, technology has changed this, with desktop publishing and free internet posting people are constantly publishing or postin documents with their own version of the logo.

For example, as the CBC noted, a visual identity policy will tell you not to stretch, distort, or in this specific case, remove the exclamation point, as demonstrated below:



The goal of a visual identity policy is to create and maintain a consistent image for all the organizations public documents. This is a good thing, it is how you build a brand. Look at some of the largest stores, corporations etc, whenever you see their logo it is always the same. You come to know and recognize it, and corporations will go a long way to protect it. In essence, properly done a visual identity policy can result in your logo actually becoming worth money. Every large organization should have one.

Opponents say that it can stifle creativity or just add a layer of bureacracy, but sometimes in this day and age, all you actually have is your name and your reputation, and a visual identity policy is one way you can try to control how they are used.