As we look forward to the next 50 years of communication, many in our industry are trying to predict which channels and information sources audiences may trust most in the years ahead.

Will mainstream media be obliterated by "citizen journalists" who self publish their thoughts on a whim -- and who don't always subscribe to conventions of journalistic integrity such as rigorous fact-checking and multiple sources commonplace in mainstream media?

And will online/digital sources of information replace the stalwarts of the media world today? Or will the biggest names in news simply keep evolving their product offerings into new formats?

The answer is probably somewhere in between.

Today, LexisNexis unveiled the results of a new survey asking consumers about the kinds of information channels and sources they trust most today for critical news (such as pandemics, looming weather events, etc.), and which sources they'll likely rely on in the future.

A few of their key findings:

* Today, consumers still trust "traditional" media most for critical news -- "traditional" defined as professional journalists from newspapers, television and radio (and their related Web offerings)

* Emerging media including citizen journalists (eg, bloggers), Web-only news outlets, and direct to audience communications tools like podcasts took a distant second in trust for "breaking" news.

Neither of these two conclusions should come as a big surprise. But it's important for professional communicators to read between the lines here: The method by which information is published or shared isn't nearly as important as the credibility of the source and the journalistic integrity behind the information. New media channels such as Web-based news outlets are among the most trusted information resources, so long as they're authored by someone who can be trusted to tell it to you straight.

It's also important to note that this survey speaks primarily to breaking news -- like the live reports from the shores when a hurricane is coming in -- not more "niche" news that's specific to an individual's interests. Other studies clearly show that consumers rely on the Web for finding more in-depth information and dialogue about sharply-defined topics of interest. While the Today Show or MSNBC.com may cover a myriad of technology-related stories, Apple loyalists may find more news and opinions specific to their interests on The Unoffical Apple Weblog (TUAW).

The Internet has made it easier than ever before to get news on demand any time of the day, on any particular topic. And as consumption of "traditional" (print newspapers, magazines, TV) continues to decline across many demographic sets, more and more individuals are feeding their growing appetite for news -- particularly news specific to topics of interest -- by going online. As consumers get more comfortable with getting specific news online, you can bet that they'll get (and trust) more of their "breaking" news from online sources too.

Lexis-Nexis went on to ask survey participants about how their media consumption habits are likely to change in the future.

The key take-away? Most consumers say that, in the future, they'll be a bit more "inclusive" in their media consumption, relying on both traditional/mainstream/established media channels and more "emerging" channels such as bloggers and direct-to-consumer sources like podcasts.

As we continue to evaluate the right channels for communicating with our target audiences effectively, it will become increasingly important to understand which information sources, channels and technologies they trust most. And adapt the way that we tell our clients' and organizations' stories accordingly.

At GolinHarris, we're investing a great deal of intellectual capital in preparing for the changes already underway. We're refining (and in some cases, building anew) the processes and tools that allow our teams to move quickly with changing consumer media habits and build creative campaigns that reach audiences effecitvely in the myriad of channels they trust.

One such example of this is Dialogue -- our approach for delivering client messages across relevant channels whether online, offline, or even experiential. For each client's unique communications challenge and audience, we devise a creative strategy and deliver messages appropriately through the right mix of channels that matter to the people we're trying to reach.

50 years from now, it's hard to imagine exactly what the landscape of influential media might look like, but it's safe to say those with a track-record of accuracy and balance in reporting will come out on top. Whether it's online or off.

On a recent visit to our office in Taiwan, our staff there complained about a disturbing trend in their market. Due to declining revenues from shrinking readership and viewership, Taiwanese newspapers and TV news programs have begun selling news coverage to local businesses. The segments which are hardly distinguishable from the real news are sold like advertising, then inserted into the news broadcasts with the unpaid news stories. In print, the purchased content even carries the byline of a regular reporter.

Not surprisingly, our people are troubled by this trend. In some cases, their clients are asking them to develop the content for the "fake" news stories rather than pay for a PR campaign. In other cases, they are questioning the value of even conducting a media relations campaign when they can get guaranteed results by simply buying the coverage.

Aside from the business issues, the new development presents deeper ethical issues. The controversy in the US over the unidentified use of VNRs pales in comparison to the idea of paying the stations to get a preproduced segment included in the news. Could such a trend ever surface in the western media?

It sounds unfathomable but in the future as media outlets search for new revenue sources it is not impossible that selling editorial will seem like a reasonable business strategy.

If you had any doubt of the power of viral videos, look no further than the $1.6 billion price tag commanded by YouTube in its sale to Google. Viral videos, sweetheart of the consumer-generated media revolution, are very big business.

Why? For starters they really are a medium of, by and for the people. Anyone with a digicam and a creative eye for everyday life can stream a steady flow of content at virtually no cost to audiences that number in the millions.

Created in the language of the people, viral videos are fun, funky, irreverent. The higher the freak factor, the better for buzz-based consumers.

And they leverage an inherently visual medium to the hilt, featuring content that is cut to fit the small-screen viewing of the Net in both format and duration. That’s why all those attention span-challenged types in the blogosphere are coming back for more on sites like YouTube or Google Video (well, guess they're one in the same now).

It all adds up to authenticity, that Holy Grail of veracity coveted by every marketer and PR pro trying to get in the game of viral, word of mouth communications. Authenticity is the currency that enables brands to barter with next-gen consumers for awareness and ultimately advocacy. And viral videos are loaded with it.

So what do we as communicators do to harness YouTube’s authentic power of the people, short of shelling out a billion and half dollars for one of these sites?

Actually it’s probably more important what we don’t do -- namely, don’t try to force the rules of old-school marketing down the throat of this new medium.

Bastardize the medium and you bastardize your brand.

If we’re going to speak to this community we need to honor, or even create, boundaries that separate the editorial from the advertorial. That’s why I’m down on videos like Norelco Shave Everywhere or even the semi-celebrated Singing Smirnoff Yuppies.

Yeah, they’re trying to be funny, even absurd, but it’s still just an ad in a viral video’s clothing. Kinda like a bad infomercial, on crack. That might work for the ad guys, but as PR people we can aim higher.

Respect the medium and the medium will respect your brand.

The folks at Nintendo have a very cool take on this with the MySpace community they created for their new Wii video game console.

With an eye to leveraging the viral video phenom, Nintendo built the initial iteration of its profile around a contest to get people to submit videos of themselves playing with the new Wii controller. The only criteria: 30 seconds or less and be sure the subject involved Wii. Otherwise it was up to the people to film it, post it, rate it, chat about it.

It was done above board, people knew it was a Nintendo-sponsored contest that basically set the field of play and then backed off to let the people do their thing. Consumers got a chance to flex their creative muscles and show off a little while Nintendo was able to have real people show others what they’d do with the company’s hot new product.

That’s about as close to respecting the medium as I’ve seen. With interest in viral videos spiked by the YouTube deal, hopefully more companies and their communicators will keep the power of viral videos where it belongs, with the people.

For the last 50 years, the world has watched in awe as Japan has built a powerhouse economy that has dominated the world in the consumer electronics and automotive industries. In the next 50 years, they we will be watching to see how this efficient, well-managed society deals with an even bigger issue -- Longevity.

Today, Japan had the highest proportion of citizens over 65 of any country of the world. They also have the lowest proportion of children under the age of 15. Combine these figures with a restrictive immigration policy and you can see that the Japanese population is on an unprecedented, irreversible decline.

Current studies predict that by 2020 Japan will have an old age dependency ratio of 46%, the highest in the world. This means 46% of the population will be supported by the other 54%. An almost one-to-one ratio. By comparison, in that same year, through the US Social Security system, two workers will support one retiree.

310,000 Japanese Baby Boomers are expected to retire next year. Twice the number as this year. In 2009, that number will reach 410,000.

As it has in the past with other problems like air pollution, Japanese society will develop innovative methods for dealing with the impact of an aging society. Already, a number of NGOs have formed to leverage the intellectual capital of the older generation. The Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA) works with business trade associations to send retired executives to developing countries, like Indonesia, where their business acumen can be put to use to solve local social problems. So far the volunteers have found the experience very rewarding and have signed up for repeated tours of duty.

Imagine the potential if, instead of playing golf everyday, future retirees from developed countries worked abroad to improve the lives of the rest of the world. Sort of like the Peace Corps with gray hair and lots of experience.

Let's see what other solutions the Japanese come up with.

As we have noted, there are more than 2 million NGO's in the US. By contrast, as recently as 1999, there were a mere 6,000 in China. In seven short years, that number has grown exponentially to more than 150,000. Because international NGO's are not allowed to raise money in China, many of the larger NGO's are actually owned by the government. Ironically, they are called Gongos -- government-owned, non-governmental organizations. Make sense? They absorb 85 percent of all donations.

Speaking of donations, in the US, charitable giving almost equals 2% of the GDP, while in China that number is much lower at only 0.05%. Most of the corporate contributions come from multi-nationals like IBM who create learning centers in schools or Microsoft who provides computer training for the unemployed. Leading domestic companies contribute less than 0.3% of their post tax income to charity compared to the Fortune 500, which averages about 2%.

For now, giving in China is less about social change and more focused on family and government projects. But in the coming decades, Chinese companies will realize that CSR can be an important business strategy especially as they establish their brands in the West.

I’m often asked if there is a single, simple, universal “litmus test” evaluation and measurement question that captures the most important thing (albeit not everything).

There is no silver bullet for our ADDriven, quick-fix fascination with 30 second management, instant insights, and snap solutions, but one question comes pretty darn close.

If you had to ask one and only one question that can be adapted to fit myriad situations, it would be:

“Would you recommend ____________________to family, friends, neighbors or co-workers, if they ask your candid and honest opinion?”

(e) Definitely Not

A nifty article from Business 2.0, courtesy of Fred (see link below), gives some of whys and wherefores. But the best thing to do is give it a shot yourself.

http://money.cnn.com/magazines/business2/business2_archive/2005/09/01/8356514/index.htm

What a brilliant idea. And it is one of the simplest I’ve seen in a long time.

October is Breast Cancer Awareness Month, and it seems like the whole world is pink. You name a category, and at least one big player is offering a pink version of whatever-it-is this month.

So why not a soup company? And why would that be interesting?

It’s because it’s Campbell’s we’re talking about, and the fact that their iconic red and white soup cans…aren’t red and white anymore.

Yes, this month they’re pink, and you have to go to Kroger’s to find them. Kroger bought double its usual stock of Campbell’s Chicken Noodle and Tomato varieties this month (those are the ones sporting the pink label and pink ribbon) to support its partnership with the Susan G. Komen Breast Cancer Foundation. It’s a test program, and I think it will work. Wait to see lots more pink soup cans next October, on lots of retailers’ shelves.

We all know that linking with a cause works for brands. Our own CSR study, called “Doing Well By Doing Good,” finds that 67% of Americans believe that good corporate citizenship is a smart business strategy. That said, certain issues and causes may seem a little crowded. One might say this about breast cancer.

But Campbell’s move doesn’t seem me-too, or tired, or late to the discussion. Why is that? It’s because their red and white can, immortalized by Andy Warhol in the 70’s and barely changed since it was introduced 108 years ago, is just supposed to be red and white. The fact that this month it’s pink will turn heads and turns hearts—toward Campbell’s. Consumers will want to see these cans in their shopping carts and in their pantry. It will cause them to think differently about a brand they thought they knew.

That’s not just good cause marketing, it’s smart marketing period. And that’s exactly what the best cause marketing strategies are.

I recall a certain journalism professor from college days who took great pride quizzing students about the top stories du jour from the major daily newspapers.

While some students were sure to glance at the headlines before entering his classroom, others clearly didn't dive any deeper into the newspaper than the drink specials listed on the back of the sports page. And they paid for it.

He argued that our society was growing increasingly apathetic about news, and that my generation was in jeopardy of becoming so ignorant about world affairs, those of us interested in a career in journalism were doomed.

My, how times have changed.

With the advent of 24-hour television news networks, new on-demand delivery channels and Web-based media offerings, news junkies can and do get their fill around the clock.

Just look across the pond for proof. Jupiter Research released findings from a new study that indicates (brace yourself) European consumers now spend more time online than reading newspapers and magazines.

Not a huge "aha" in and of itself. But here's the kicker: the Web overtook the top spot without cannibalizing print and television consumption. In fact, TV viewing across Europe rose from 10 hours to 12 hours per week. And print consumption managed to stay the same at 3 hours per week.

What's this mean for companies trying to reach news-hungry European audiences?

Quite simply, we PR folk need to think bigger than just a single news delivery strategy and take our clients' (European or otherwise) stories to a myriad of channels that matter to our audiences.

As consumer appetites for news grow, so too must our ability to deliver messages appropriately in these new channels. We PR practitioners need to be more versatile, jumping back and forth between "old" and "new" media channels without blinking an eye.

It's clear that the desire to stay in-the-know is increasing -- a real opportunity for professional communicators now and in the future -- and something that would make my prof proud.

Want the recipe for developing a successful news product?

- Add 1 part news reporting from trusted, professional journalists.

- Combine with 1 part citizen-generated/contributed news.

- Sprinkle with some interactivity and Web communications tools.... and voilà!

As newspaper circulation rates continue to slide (with another new report issued today showing accelerated declines), publishers are looking for new ways to attract and retain their audiences.

According to the Newspaper Association of America, mainstream newspaper publishers are learning quickly that combining traditional news stories -- penned by professional reporters -- with unique stories or supplements submitted by citizens creates a news package many can't pass up.

NAA reports that online news sites attracted a record 58 million unique visitors last month -- an increase of nearly 24 percent over the same period last year.

The association attributes Web news' appeal to "introducing new content and applications, including video and podcasts, and creating platforms that allow the local community to contribute and share ideas, opinions and information"

As new digital channels and technologies make it easier for individuals to take part in the news process, it's safe to say we'll see even more integration of "professional" news reporting and localized perspective from engaged citizens. The voice of each consumer will grow louder and more influential.

What's this mean for communicators and those we represent?

We need to become increasingly skilled at identifying brand ambassadors and encourage them to share positive stories about our companies, products and services to complement traditional news reporting.

And it can't be forced -- it must be earned. Smart companies are paying close attention to its most influential customers and are giving them new reasons every day to remain loyal and spread the word.

Loyalty is earned in many ways, but let's focus on two:

First, give your special customers privileges not offered to all. Make them feel valued and unique. When Volkswagen reintroduced the Passat in the Fall of 2005, it offered its loyalists the first opportunity to test drive the car when they showed up in local dealers. Before the general public. These folks paid VW back with their loyalty in the form of sales and positive word of mouth about the new vehicle.

Second, always deliver on your brand promises. Don't forget what's helped make customers loyal in the first place. Great products. Good customer support. Solid business practices. If these promises aren't kept, it's impossible for loyalty to be earned.

As the proximity of "official" mainstream news and consumer opinion gets closer together (literally, co-existing on the same web page in many instances), the voice of an individual can potentially carry more weight and credibility. Companies who have loyal followers who want to speak up about their positive experiences will see these opinions play out in the very channels consumers continue to trust most.