Product placement has become a staple in most companies’ marketing mix over the past decade. It is rare to see a film these days that doesn’t showcase a soft drink, an alcoholic beverage or a new car. The practice of inserting branded products into a script has expanded from film into television, to music videos, Broadway plays and most recently video games.

Donald Trump’s “Apprentice” escalated product placement to its most obvious level by selling the team competition segments, which are the focus of each show, to the highest bidder. Contestants vied to create a new sandwich for Burger King or a new jingle for Arby’s. If the on-air plugs by Mr. Trump weren’t enough, often the commercial breaks contained 60-second ads for the real product.

Reality TV is now turning the idea of product placement into company placement. As the July 24th edition of New York Times reported, the Women’s Entertainment Network (WE) will launch “Unwrapping Macy’s” on September 30, the first reality show to revolve around an American retailer. According to the article, the eight-part series will follow a handful of hardworking employees who manage the Macy’s Thanksgiving Day Parade, design elaborate window displays and scour the world for undiscovered clothing designers. This isn’t the first reality show to expose the behind-the-scenes drama at a business. “The Restaurant,” which first aired on NBC in July 2003, showcased the day-to-day issues of running a New York City eating establishment and A&E featured Southwest Airlines in a documentary series called “Airline.”

It will be interesting to see how many potential shoppers tune in to see the employees responsible for Macy’s Santa displays complaining about the “lazy, poorly performing elves.” But regardless of the ratings, we can expect to see many more corporate docudramas in the future. Despite management concerns over airing their dirty laundry on television, the public’s thirst for authentic stories will drive demand for legitimate looks inside the business world. And savvy corporations will respond by providing a peek under the tent at the most positive aspects of their business. Imagine a pharmaceutical company participating in a program that showcases their laboratory research to find the cure for breast cancer. Or the drama of hundreds of insurance agents helping people after a major hurricane. The possibilities are unlimited and so are the opportunities for corporations to tell the “real story” about how they think, act and work.

In the not too distant future, it is possible that large consumer brands will actually sponsor entire channels. Why not the “Wal-Mart Channel,” featuring programs about shopping, cooking ideas, home decorating tips and even profiles of rural America? Or the “McDonald’s Channel,” filled with shows that appeal to families on topics like nutrition, exercise and travel. Both could incorporate their most compelling employees into a reality scenarios, or document the impact of their community involvement, such as the Ronald McDonald House. Regulators might complain that America’s biggest brands are controlling the airwaves, but many of them already spend enough on advertising to support a cable network or two. However, the public won’t mind and they will definitely tune in for a taste of Corporate America. Plus, the people who do watch will likely be loyal, devoted customers – exactly the people most brands want to reach.

So stay tuned for more corporate reality. Because in a world of fragmented messages, the ability to tell an authentic story to a highly-motivated audience is a show many companies won’t want to miss.

What a surprise to learn that Time Inc. is shutting down Teen People in September. It is hard to imagine an idea with more market potential. Take one of America’s most popular magazines, which focuses on America’s most popular people, and gear it to teens who are the prime target market for every advertiser. An instant recipe for success.

So what happened? According to the New York Times, both circulation and advertising were dropping, which meant the magazine was losing money. But why?

It could be as the Times speculated. The marketplace is too crowded with celebrity news, since both Celebrity Living and Elle Girl closed earlier this year. Or maybe it’s because advertisers are diverting their ad dollars online where more and more teens are congregating. Or maybe it’s because teens are simply reading less than they used to. That’s an ominous trend for all teen media and the adult print media waiting for them to grow up. Or maybe it’s something else.

Is it remotely possible that teenage Americans are losing interest in celebrities? Is it conceivable that kids are getting tired of reading about how much Nicole Richie weighs and who Nick Lachey is dating?

This is difficult to fathom. But perhaps the desire for authenticity is penetrating the younger demographic. Maybe the adults of tomorrow are becoming more interested in each other’s lives than those in Hollywood. Maybe they are finding communication with peers on MySpace is more satisfying than reading about Lindsay Lohan. Maybe the real world is becoming as fascinating as the celebrity world.

If this trend is real, it could pose an enormous future challenge for the companies that rely on celebrities to promote their products. In fact, just this week Versace launched their new ad campaign, which eschewed Madonna for the old-fashioned fashion model. It also wouldn’t bode well for celebrity publicists. If fan magazines continue to shutter, publicists are going to have a lot fewer covers to negotiate for their star clientele.

Teen People’s demise is probably just a speed bump on the Hollywood freeway of fame and fortune. Or maybe it is the beginning of a subtle shift of America’s youth toward more authentic content. The coming years will confirm if there will be more Paris Hiltons or more Holiday Inns.

It looks like ad agencies are catching on to the power of authentic communication. On Wednesday, September 13th, the Wall Street Journal reported that this season's premier of the popular reality series "America's Next Top Model" on the CW network will feature a new kind of commercial they have dubbed a "wrap." A wrap is essentially a two minute segment that airs during commercial breaks but looks like part of the program and features a celebrity spokesperson discussing trends and tips on topics the audience of 18 to 24 year old women are interested in. For example, a TV personality might talk about the latest hair styles with another female guest. The first 90 seconds will be general discussion while the last 30 seconds will weave in a demonstration of a specific product like Herbal Essence shampoo.

Does this sound at all familiar? The answer is obvious to those who work in PR. It is exactly what PR people have been doing for years -- using credible spokespeople to deliver a product message in the context of an interesting interview.

The only difference here is that the segment is being paid for and in this case it costs about one million dollars for production and airtime.

Maybe the cost of these "soft sell" ads will be too high for traditional marketers and this experiment will fail. But it is still a disturbing trend to see ad agencies buying what PR agencies have delivered for years. It makes it clear that the traditional boundaries between our disciplines are fading and that PR people are going to have to be even more innovative in the future if they want to hang on to their place in the marketing mix.

Well, well, well...sometimes validation comes from the strangest places. Maybe I've just been watching the PR flack's "Director's Cut" of the classic flick, Miracle on 34th Street, where in a fit of charity and bonhomie Macy's starts sending customers to Gimbels, but I was gratified to read that Fleishman-Hilliard just recently stumbled upon an insight that GolinHarris discovered, documented and has been tracking for four years now, since 2003:

When it comes to business earning its stripes as a good corporate citizen, Americans believe that the litmus test and job #1 is how a business values and treats its employees!

Preposterous you say? Well, if you don't take my word for it, then take Fleishman-Hilliard’s and the National Consumers' League, as reported by the Grey Lady herself in a business story slugged, “Corporate Conscience Survey Says Workers Should Come First,” (NYT, 31 May 2006).

Here's the wood: "Far more American consumers consider the way companies treat their employees a good indicator of their social conscience than their philanthropy.”

Isn’t that interesting.

GolinHarris' annual "Doing Well by Doing Good" corporate citizenship survey discovered way back in 2003 that "how a business values and treats its employees" is one of the top two drivers of corporate citizenship, right up there with "ethical, honest, transparent and accountable executives and business practices," so sayeth nearly two-thirds of Americans.

More importantly, "how a business values and treats its employees" is no random blip on the corporate citizenship radar screen, a reputational UFO of little consequence to the traffic controllers of corporate social responsibility, charitable giving, strategic philanthropy, cause marketing, community relations, issues management and SarOx compliance.

Quite the contrary: The trend is significant, stable and sobering.

The chart below is a trend analysis from all four GolinHarris "Doing Well by Doing Good" corporate citizenship surveys...including a sneak peak at our just completed and - ssshh - not yet released 2006 study.

"Values and Treats Employees Well and Fairly"

2006 (5,000 Americans)

Importance: 69% - Rank: 1 of 12 corporate citizenship drivers

Excellent/Good Brand Performance (150 brand average): 48% - Gap: -21%

2005 (3,500 Americans)

Importance: 66% - Rank: 1 of 12 corporate citizenship drivers

Excellent/Good Brand Performance (108 brand average): 51% - Gap: -15%

2004 (1,000 Americans)

Importance: 64% - Rank: 2 of 12 corporate citizenship drivers

Excellent/Good Brand Performance (75 brand average): 52% - Gap: -12%

2003 (500 Americans)

Importance: 61% - Rank: 2 of 12 corporate citizenship drivers

Excellent/Good Brand Performance (30 brand average): 54% - Gap: -07%

Gee, think there’s a pattern here?

Not only is "values and treats employees well and fairly" consistently at the top of heap in importance, but Americans perceive business performance as anemic. . .and weakening year to year!

And if I were a betting boy, I'd double-down on "values and treats employees well and fairly" continuing its upward trajectory as more and more businesses begin to rethink, rework and retreat from the "Social Contract" that - arguably - has been the engine of American economic prosperity since World War II.

I know it sounds counter intuitive to place "values and treats employees well and fairly" to high in the Maslovian corporate citizenship hierarchy of needs because we’re conditioned to think in artificial boxes and silos of “charitable giving,” “strategic philanthropy,” “community relations,” “issue management” “EHS/sustainability,” “corporate social responsibility” and “cause marketing” -- not the holistic and integrated character of the brand’s reputation, value proposition, and stakeholder relationships that GolinHarris advocates.

That's why in this year's corporate citizenship survey we decided to push the issue front and center. We asked all 5,000 Americans if they agreed or disagreed with the following statement, allowing them to position themselves on a 10 point scale of "Very Strongly Agree" to "Very Strongly Disagree."

"A company's relationship with its employees is fundamental to a company's corporate citizenship.

Agree 73%

Strongly Agree 42%

More Agree than Disagree 30%

Mixed 22%

Disagree 05%

More Disagree than Agree 03%

More Agree than Disagree 02%

So, as we think about the Next 50 Years of Public Relations, let's not accept the old "RCA Victor" dog look that 9 out of 10 of our clients give us when they eyeball "treats employees well and fairly" high priority topic for discussion developing in corporate citizenship strategies.

(Perhaps some of you are old farts like me and can remember the venerable RCA Victor logo of the dog tilting its head in befuddlement upon hearing his master's voice bellowing from the victrola's horn).

But then, I'm just the numbers guy, pledged to confuse and confound through obfuscation and obtuseness through the fine art of lies, damn lies and statistics.

What say ye PR practitioners, professionals and pundits?

Did Fleishman-Hilliard award GolinHarris a supreme compliment and prove that old saw, "imitation is the greatest form of flattery" in concluding "far more American consumers consider the way companies treat their employees a good indicator of their social conscience than their philanthropy," or do we both have our statistical heads stuck way up in that place where the sun don't shine?

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

Consumer generated content is taking over the world. Five of the top ten websites on the net are created by consumers. Wikipedia is by far the most popular source of information online with a market share approaching 20%, eclipsing traditional resources like the Encyclopædia Britannica.

Now consumers are creating ads too. For a while, netizens have been altering existing TV commercials for fun and replaying them on YouTube, often to the dismay of the advertiser. Tapping into this trend, some adventurous marketers, like Mountain Dew are asking their consumers to make the ads for them, which they will air online and on popular cable channels like MTV and Comedy Central. Nintendo asked MySpacers to create video vignettes demonstrating how they would play with the new Wii console.

For years, advertisers have spent millions in research to better understand their target audiences. Maybe now they can just skip that stage and ask their customers to make their commercials for them.

There is no doubt the quality will suffer dramatically but they may make up for that in authenticity.

What about a real cancer patient sitting at his kitchen table talking about how a new drug saved his life? Or a real housewife in a home video explaining why she buys Tide or shops at Sears?

People have been watching funniest home videos for years. Why not best home commercials from people who are passionate about their favorite brands? Getting a real customer to endorse a product in an authentic way is the true definition of third party credibility.

Mel Gibson’s Apocalypto debuted as the number one movie this weekend, grossing $15 million at the box office. Impressive considering this is not your typical holiday movie, and it’s not your typical blockbuster movie either. After all, Apocalypto has an obscure storyline, it is incredibly violent, has no famous actors, and is entirely in Mayan dialect with English subtitles. Wow! Movie goers must really be in search of something authentic this holiday season.

Think you've got what it takes to create a Super Bowl-worthy TV spot?

Chip maker Doritos does. The latest brand to jump on the consumer generated content craze, Doritos is conducting a contest online letting snack fanatics submit their own :30 second video spots best representing the brand.

Alka-Seltzer, Chevrolet and the NFL itself are also reportedly airing consumer generated content during Super Bowl XLI.

In the Doritos promotion, brand police select finalists based on subjective criteria like "creativity" and "overall appeal" (and of course, adherence to the "no naked people" rule), and America gets to vote for their favorite finalist's short to appear in Doritos' slot during the big game -- reportedly worth more than $2.6 million this year.

While the keys to the Frito-Lay marketing machine haven't been totally turned over to the masses without some restrictions in place, it's noteworthy to see companies giving brand loyalists a bigger say in one of the most hyped advertising venues around.

If the NFL exists in some form 50 years from today, one can only imagine how we'll be enjoying games, and how marketers will be capitalizing on the Super Bowl's captive audience to deliver branded messages.

One thing's for sure: consumers and brand enthusiasts will play increasingly active roles in the creation of their marketing messages and most visible campaigns.

Today marks the 65th birthday of a legend: Muhammad Ali. The self-proclaimed "greatest of all time" boxing champ has withstood the test of time, leaving behind a legacy of sporting dominance, and more importantly, cultural change. But what was the secret to Ali's success: his superb ringmanship and boxing skills, his grandiosity and bravado, or perhaps something longer lasting - his authenticity?

While many today remember Ali as a great boxer, and others note his importance in urban culture (including being a forefather of the rap genre), Ali most notably shook the world with his opinions on society. At a time when African-American athletes were discouraged from expressing themselves too loudly, Ali brashly shouted his true feelings on a wide variety of topics, earning him both notoriety and unconditional support. Whether changing his name from Cassius Clay to Muhammad Ali, and in the process introducing many white Americans to the Nation of Islam, or refusing to enter the draft for the Vietnam war, Ali stood up for what he believed in, regardless of the penalty.

Muhammad Ali's importance extends beyond the boxing ring, as he created a forum where athletes could express, and influence, public opinion. However, unlike the multimillionaire athletes of today, Ali's actions and words were not motivated by monetary gains (in fact, Ali's actions often cost him money and nearly ended with him in jail). It is the simple truth, the authentic beliefs and feelings that Ali expressed that reverberated with Americans then, and still echo in his shadow now. Ali's lasting legacy will be his willingness to be himself, and will forever let him retain the mantle of "The Greatest."

Speaking of the turning points in the blogosphere, I wanted to highlight the ongoing discussion about blogger codes. Today’s New York Times article, “A Call for Manners” describes how bloggers are battling disturbing (and sometimes unlawful) comments posted on their sites. The article quotes several sources such as the Blogher network and the O’Reilly Radar as guides for civil conversations in the blogosphere. While some may feel that codes are restricting, others are quick to point out how these rules protect privacy, individual liberties and copyrights.

After a decade of blogging, trust remains the central issue of the blogosphere. The amount of trust readers have in a blogger affects his or her influence level, as readers take their cues from honest and accurate sources. On the flip side, when prospect bloggers weigh the plusses and minuses of publishing their thoughts, they think about the comments and reactions they will get from the community. If social media is to confirm its legitimacy as a communication channel, peer-to-peer conversations need to transpire within a trusted environment, where writers and readers can freely exchange views without infringing upon each others’ rights in any deliberate way.

A simple code of conduct would be more than verbiage added to privacy terms and conditions. It would be a badge for trusted communications. If well-known blog ad networks or industry organizations collaborate and set up guiding principles, then bloggers can show an icon on their areas and take a stand for legitimate, civilized communications. Similar to the way online shopping areas sign up with the Better Business Bureau or VeriSign to instill confidence in their visitors and to do business the right way, bloggers can display the stamp of ethical, trusted communications on their sites.

The April issue of Wired Magazine contains an interesting story called “The See-Through CEO,” which is very relevant to the concept of authenticity that our agency believes is at the heart of future communications.

The sub-title of the article states, “Fire the publicist. Go off message. Let our employees blab and blog.” While, as the head of a PR firm, I am forced to take issue with those specific actions, the message behind them has a lot of merit.

The reporter, Clive Thompson, cites a number of examples of “radical transparency,” where companies literally share everything about their business, including complaints about competitors, profit margins on particular products, and specific corporate strategies. Obviously, this is not a tactic that works for every corporation. Secrecy is still a critical tool in the intensely competitive marketplace and the element of surprise can be highly effective in building excitement for a new product.

But there are many business situations where it makes a lot of sense to reach out to employees, customers and critics to explain how a company feels about a specific issue or why it has chosen a specific course of action. And the internet provides the perfect tool to the communicative CEO who wants to tell his story in the most direct, immediate and transparent way.

The concept of “radical transparency” probably sounds a bit “too radical” for most businesses but in reality it is just an euphemism for authenticity –- telling the truth using real words that people can understand. There is nothing radical about that.

You’ve got to love The Simpsons.

Even if you don’t, you’ve got to love the way they’ve marketed this movie.

It’s masterful, really, and it carries a few lessons.

First, they pulled out the tried and true, with a contest to find THE Springfield. It’s been done a thousand times, but it worked…because it works. Springfields competed, publicity galore happened, and Vermont won. Simple and brilliant. The lesson: Don’t push so hard. Sometimes what’s obvious is what’s right—if you do it right.

Then it got more fun. Jet Blue captured a little of the magic it was known for before last winter, by becoming the Official Airline of Springfield. Jet Blue transported the “cast” to the opening in…yes, Springfield, Vermont. That would have been a nice idea. What was a great idea was when the Chairman of Jet Blue turned over his blog to C. Montgomery Burns for a few days. That’s Homer’s boss, and as you can imagine he had lots of great advice for Jet Blue and everyone else. The lesson: When you’re a full partner, put all your assets on the table and imagine the possibilities.

But, for those who missed it, here’s the best part: Product placement turned inside out. Placing products in the movie was a non-starter. It doesn’t fit. But turning 7-11s into fictional Kwik-E-Marts, with shelves full of Krusty-Os and “Squishees” pouring from the Slurpee machines, brought an animated movie into real life in a completely unexpected and strangely authentic way. The lesson: Turn standard ideas upside down and you might be surprised what you see.

I probably shouldn’t admit this, but I’ve never seen The Simpsons on TV. But I know good marketing when I see it, and this is it. That alone earns it $10 for my ticket.

We spend a tremendous amount of time at GolinHarris talking about the importance of being authentic, so when you read about something that's about as far away from authentic as possible, you have to point it out.

Recently a local advertising agency in Miami got snagged. Here's what happened:

The Miami Herald decided to host an online poll of its readers to see which new "Downtown Miami" logo they liked best. After the contest was over, The Herald analyzed their computer network and noted that someone at the ad agency who had created several of the logos, voted more than 1,500 times for one particular image (the "winning" logo). Unfortunately for them, when all was said and done, the real winner was a design created by the City's in-house design team. (See article: http://www.miamiherald.com/news/miami_dade/story/246669.html)

How embarrassing for the agency. They obviously had little confidence in their work - and in the end, have soiled their reputation. What was the worst that could have happened? Their logo didn't win?

Let's face it, everyone who works in creative industries has a great deal of pride in their work. But if something created isn't right, and won't get the desired results, isn't it better to find out the right way than to try and create a new reality? In the end that's a loosing proposition.

This company has gone down the wrong road and is forgetting that it's a new, transparent world in which we live. The new WikiScanner, a tool that tracks anonymous edits to Wikipedia sites, is a great example of how important it is for PR professionals to practice an authentic approach to every aspect of client communications.

When all is said and done, I hope the Miami ad agency that created the logo campaign uses better judgment when it comes to billing the client and doesn't charge for the time they spent voting!

Steve Jobs knows how to throw a party.

No, not that Steve Jobs. This one.

We often talk about the value of word of mouth in public relations and the ways marketers can engage their most loyal customers to create excitement. And over the past decade, few brands have tapped the enthusiasm of its customers like Apple. But what's the company's secret sauce?

With typical pomp and circumstance, this past weekend Apple released the latest version of its OS X operating system -- Leopard. Reports indicate the company sold more than 2 million copies in three days, making OS 10.5 the most successful software launch in the brand's history. And at $129 per single user copy, that translates into better than a quarter of a billion dollars of cash.

So what's Apple doing right?

Last Friday, I got a glimpse of Apple's marketing magic firsthand. I ventured out early that evening to my local mall in hopes of grabbing my own copy of Leopard on the way home from the office. What I didn't know is what I'd encounter when I got there.

Nearly two hours later, I walked out with my copy and a better appreciation of what makes the Apple machine tick.

The atmosphere was a little bit like standing in queue for World Series tickets. Self-professed MacAddicts were lining up adorned in apparel from previous product launches. There were the iPhone t-shirts. The OS X Tiger (the last operating system) launch party gear. And I swear I spied one brandmark tattoo.

A young man standing in front of me -- an early adolescent no older than 13 -- sat indian-style on the ground with a Powerbook in his lap, continuously refreshing Apple.com's countdown ticker to Leopard's availability, while clutching a well-worn iPhone in his left hand. He was texting scores of friends and planning his own ad hoc launch party for later that evening when he planned to install the new software at home.

As the Apple Store staff worked the lines chatting up customers and handing out bottled water, they singled him out by name and expressed their gratitude that he was there.

It was clear this was the "connection" marketers dream about building with their customers.

Lots of things contribute to Apple's ongoing success, but here are three which helped Leopard get off to a running start this week:

*Keeping it simple. The new operating system is said to include more than 300+ new features and enhancements, but just 10 are touted heavily in publicity efforts, advertising and even product packaging. While innovation runs deep, Apple doesn't complicate things by promoting every single improvement.

As passers-by stopped to inquire about the growing line outside the Apple Store last Friday night, customers there found it easy to explain the excitement, and relate a few innovative features that made Leopard worth their wait.

A quick look at Apple's Web site illustrates the focused nature of the company's communication. Laundry lists of improvements are hard to find, while simple explanations of a few key technologies (complete with narrated demos) show practical benefits in consumer-speak.

Even the product itself is sold in a more streamlined way than its competition. While Microsoft offers its Vista OS in four different versions -- each with different features and price points-- Apple released a single consumer version of Leopard for all. This "streamlining" makes it much easier to absorb information and spread the word. (To see the contrast yourself, check out the Vista information page, turn away from the screen, and try to recount even a few basic features.)

*Recognizing and rewarding the most loyal. The first few dozen customers in line received commemorative Leopard T-shirts. And the full Apple Store staff welcomed them in, complete with pats on the back and words of thanks. Simple freebies like water bottles while you're waiting in line and interaction with store staff go a long way and show customers they're valued.

There's evidence Apple is now rewarding loyalists by embracing the "consumer generated" media of its fan base, snatching up "fanvertising" created on YouTube to become formal ads for its products.

*Creating personal connections. The Apple Store is a huge component in creating "personal" relationships with the brand. Its Genius Bars allow anybody with a question to come in and chat with an expert and get one-on-one attention. And in my experience, the folks staffing these desks aren't just technically-sound employees, they're brand fanatics, too. Their enthusiasm is contagious, and their customer service is, by most accounts, great.

The young man in line ahead of me was aglow when one of the Apple Store employees singled him out and took a few seconds to chat. That personal touch cannot be replaced by any other kind of communication or marketing. And it's something that will bring him back for the next launch of whatever-Steve-has-up-his-sleeve.

While this was quite a detour from my planned Friday activities, it was a great opportunity as a marketer to see brand building up close. And learn a few ways that Apple stays "connected" to its consumers.

Anderson Cooper, beware. Seventeen-year old high school student James Brierton is about to give you a run for your money. And the folks paying your salary -- CNN -- are giving him all the tools he needs.

Today, CNN is planning to formally launch iReport.com -- a novel news portal featuring reports from everyday citizens who witness news first-hand. CNN's approach is laissez faire, providing only the platform for individuals to post, comment and rate news items from the public. It plans to exercise no editorial control, according to MediaWeek.

Mainstream media's efforts to blend "social media" with professionally reported news isn't particularly new. We've seen plenty of examples of blending news from citizen and established sources together in the past. What's unique about CNN's new iReport.com effort is that it's completely firewalled from the company's "core" news products.

(CNN's iReport Beta)

iReport blends a number of simple publishing tools and collaboration technologies into what appears to be a promising news product. Contributors who publish the most highly-regarded content (as rated by the community) most often receive the biggest accolade -- an "iReporter Superstar" designation. A quick look at early iReporter profiles unearths participants from Los Angeles to Des Moines to New York, mostly high school and college age.

James Brierton (known as "jbjimbo") is one such contributor. His brief bio on the site suggests he's a serial reporter, participating in his school newspaper, an online radio station, and more. James has shared more than a dozen stories with the world in his perspective via CNN's iReporter portal, ranging from political commentary, severe weather, local crime, to social issues.

While technology helps facilitate the growth of citizen journalists like James, it's not the primary reason they participate. Most contributors share because they have a point of view or a story to tell, and want to reach as broad of an audience as possible. Technology just makes it easier.

And technology isn't the reason why news seekers' appetites for first-person news grows, either. The reason citizen-penned content is becoming more attractive is authenticity. With the flurry of news choices at our fingertips, hungry news seekers increasingly want news without spin, direct from real people, in their own words. These unfiltered sources are now one of many key ways individuals consider different viewpoints and formulate their own opinions.

From a PR perspective, it's becoming more important for communications initiatives to help encourage or facilitate first-hand reporting. The more that practitioners can help create the environment for authentic buzz to grow through tools like iReport, the more they'll see authentic citizen reports about their companies and brands.

In late February, results from a new Zogby Poll emerged, confirming the continued erosion of trust in "traditional" media. These days, fully 2/3 of Americans say they're dissatisfied with the quality of journalism in the United States.

The same survey reported that nearly half of all Americans now consider the Internet as their primary news and information gathering source. It has emerged as the single most important channel, just as newspapers, radio, and television have each been regarded in the past.

As PR and marketing pros consider how to tell their stories most effectively in digital media, one of the most promising opportunities of the future is Web-based video.

Want proof that the online video market is maturing rapidly? Consider the following three news stories breaking today:

#1: Disney
At this morning's McGraw-Hill Media Summit in New York, Disney's Bob Iger decreed that broadband-enabled Web content represents the future of communication, ultimately replacing television as the prime source of entertainment.

Iger says Disney is on track to generate more than $1 billion in revenue from online channels in 2008. The company has seen early wins streaming broadcast content online, such as ABC's "Lost". Iger says his company will continue to focus on digital, direct-to-consumer distribution channels in the future.

Implication: The business case for online video exists and early adopters like Disney are beginning to see returns. Where the dollars go so too go the marketers, the media companies, their content, and correspondingly larger audiences.

#2: News Corp. & NBC Universal

Hulu.com - an online video platform created by News Corp. and NBC Universal (GE) launched today. The ad-supported online video network allows consumers to choose and watch more than 250 TV shows or more than 100 full-length movies in any Web browser, anytime, anywhere. It's a massive online library of content that's sure to grow, and requires little technical knowledge nor mammoth downloads to use.

Implication: Web video technology has finally advanced to a level making it simple enough for most consumers to use. And the content is becoming available (free!) to attract eyeballs. The two biggest factors impeding growth now appear to be vanishing.

#3: YouTube

Google makes a big move to "open" its popular YouTube technology to the outside world. Today, the video sharing giant announced a new set of developer tools (known as APIs) allowing individuals and organizations to intermix the YouTube experience into their own Web sites and online properties.

Implication: Web video isn't just for professionals anymore, nor will it be limited to a few major sites. The barriers of entry to shooting, publishing and sharing video easily are quickly disappearing.

What's at the heart of these big announcements? America's growing appetite for multimedia content fed by peppy broadband connections to an increasingly "Internet-savvy" populace.

And the market potential isn't ripe merely for media companies hoping to share entertainment content. Smart marketers and organizations are increasingly using it to advance their business objectives.

How can it be used effectively in a PR or marketing campaign? Perhaps its biggest promise is the format's potential to deliver authentic customer stories and drive word of mouth. Video "personalizes" stories and makes arguments more convincing by letting us (virtually) look into the eye of the message bearer.

PR pros can help their clients by mining customers or other stakeholder groups to identify and encourage those who can authentically tell the organization's stories.

2008 has clearly been the year for China to be featured daily in the global media. The intensive coverage began on a positive note months back as the Olympic fever began, but then turned fairly negative as protestors targeted the Olympic torch relay as it crossed the globe to air concerns on various China domestic matters, most notably Tibet. It's been interesting to read the global media coverage compared to the domestic Chinese media coverage on both of these key events. To hear both sides of the story has been fascinating. This is the kind of stuff which doctoral students live for, and I'm sure someone is already writing that thesis right now.

Sadly, though, China is now dominating the global news once again but this time following this week's devastating earthquake in Western China. As I write, the death toll is reaching nearly 15,000 but we all are braced for the reality that this toll will dramatically increase in the hours and days to come.

Unlike SARS, there does not seem to be debate on how open the Chinese media have been during this tragedy. In fact, it's in many ways been a demonstration of how far China has really progressed. Within an hour of the disaster, President Hu Jintao had called for all-out rescue efforts. By early evening, Premier Wen Jiabo had already arrived in Sichuan province. Premier Wen Jiabo then visited those areas not simply for photo opportunities but to ensure the rescue work was progressing and he was personally comforting victims, in particular children. In respect of the tragedy, the Olympic Torch relay was scaled back and donations collected along the route. Further, China readily welcomed offers of international aid, not as a sign of weakness to accept help but in the spirit that any and all help is appreciated.

For global critics of Chinese journalism, it would be interesting to hear how they now regard China's openness. Since the tragedy struck, China has been delivering comprehensive coverage of the tragedy and essentially giving international media free reign to cover the aftermath. While the world's sympathy is with China today, one would expect questions soon to follow regarding building safety standards, food and water supplies and other matters. But China isn't focused on potential criticism today, it's focused on saving lives right now. One would expect China to receive high marks with freedom of the press for this disaster. In fact, some readers of international media have already complained about the graphic images of the dead. A number of readers in Hong Kong's South China Morning Post described the front page images of dead children's bodies as highly inappropriate – one reader said “I was saddened and horrified to be confronted with the graphic and frankly gratuitous image of dead children's bodies on the front page…”

Though these are difficult stories to read and images to see, it's critical that the world see the devastation in detail… and in the process, a different side of the Chinese people's hearts and souls. It's also important to look at the actions of the central government and local authorities who have acted with great care and speed during the nation's hour of need. Without question, the media have been able to document every step.

For once, global community, let's applaud China's press… no one could have been more open or accommodating than they have been since their worst earthquake in over a generation.

All of us in the communications field lost a great role model today with the passing of Tim Russert, Washington Bureau Chief for NBC News and moderator of the popular Sunday morning "Meet the Press" news program.

Tonight's news coverage -- on NBC and competing networks alike -- paid tribute to Russert's unique abilities as a communicator. What made him so effective and trusted by those who watched and admired him?

Authenticity.

It's something we talk about frequently in public relations as the "secret sauce", but few capture it as well as Russert did in his 58 years.

He often spoke of the importance of communicating simply, directly and in an unassuming way so that all could easily understand the complex political issues of the day. Do you remember Tim's famous low-tech dry erase board in the Bush vs. Gore 2000 presidential election? Florida. Florida. Florida. (This board now resides in the Smithsonian.)

And when Russert proclaimed Obama as the presumptive Democratic nominee for this election, America listened.

His passion for politics was contagious. My wife often asked why I was so drawn to a political news program on Sunday mornings. Russert made news approachable, interesting, and human.

Pundits on both sides of the political aisle have come out in droves tonight to talk about his fair dealings, objectivity, and passion for the topics he covered. And above all else, they talked about his authenticity as a communicator and a man.

What a legacy. Communicators for generations to come will surely study Russert in the hopes to emulate him and his success as one of the most effective communicators of our day.