Field Notes Inside an Integrated Communications Agency

A brand with the fangs of a dragon and the sights of a Stinger Missile is back. It's one of my favorite brands of all time -- especially when its tough and unflinching. It's The News and Observer. And over the last three months, it's reminded everyone from the governor to the Joe & Jane Public just how it earned its reputation as one of the nation's best dailies. This even as it lays off staff. In fact, because of the challenges facing the N&O, its fire-breathing return to fighting form should be an inspiration to all businesses.

A newspaper -- like a lot of enterprises -- serves many audiences and often shifts its brand identity to meet different needs. The brand identity that's conspicuously roared back at the N&O isn't the USA Today-style shorts and tips. It's the investigative reporting, agitator-for-the-public-good brand that made the paper's bones under the leadership of its founders and legendary editors like Pulitzer-winner Claude Sitton. The firebrand brand, if you will.

This isn't to say the N&O ever lost that element of its character. It's just that recently the paper has become a must-read thanks to coverage of stumbles on mental health policy and other government goofs. Did you catch the phrase "must-read"? What print publication in America wouldn't kill for that description?

So what? Well, the big biz lesson here is the wisdom in tough times of identifying and seizing on your strongest value proposition, the one thing that makes you close to indispensable. The N&O is apparently betting its key value is uncovering and righting wrongs. Considering how much buzz I've heard about the paper's recent front page stories, I'd be hard pressed to disagree.

On another front, Starbucks is going through a similar process. As it closes stores, the kingdom of caffeine is re-evaluating what it does best -- is it the half-caff skinny mochas or classic rock CDs? Thousands of companies big and small across recession-wracked America face similar challenges. I'm impressed and thankful the N&O is answering the questions with an exclamation point.

(Full disclosure: I was a reporter at the N&O for two years under the aforementioned Claude Sitton and alongside some of the guys still running the paper's investigative operations. And yes, I still love them, the paper and the whole notion of daily journalism.)

 The company that gave us one of the world's most horrific environmental disasters is now serving up another spectacle -- this one colored green rather than muck-black.  Two decades after the Valdez spill, a corporate fight is spilling out of Exxon's boardroom.  

As reported by The New York Times, the Rockefeller family wants to strip Rex W. Tillerson of his position as chairman because of perceived foot-dragging on sustainability issues.

It's encouraging to see business titans battling to determine how to be strategically, effectively, profitably green.  Thomas "The World is Flat" Friedman indicated the green revolution won't have really started until people stop talking happy and start throwing elbows.  At that point we'll know something big is at stake.  Dressing down a a board chairman looks pretty big from here. 

What does Exxon do next?  Probably, the media attention means it has to get more out front on sustainability.  Chalk one up for the Rockefellers and the planet.

Having notched a devastating defeat in the NC primary, Hillary Clinton now needs to figure out how to lose like a winner.  She might just find a mentor in our own Clay Aiken.  The carrot-topped crooner turned a second-place "American Idol" finish into a first-rate career move.  Can Hillary do the same as it becomes clear she won't be the top "Democratic Idol" come convention time? 

My advice is for her to stay in the race a little longer, but to soften her tone.  Keep Obama on his toes.  He desperately needs a sparring partner, as his sputtering performances over the last two months make plain.  But don't draw blood. 

Then, once the superdelegates begin their group march toward Obama, Hill ought to graciously withdraw and move quickly into her next incarnation -- Obama campaigner, Senate superpower and globe-trotting diplomat.  Now as for Bill (who's still the coolest Democrat alive), that's a whole other question ...  

Does it make you ‘light in the loafers’ to think the word 'pansy' has no place in a discussion between a governor and a candidate for president? Is it more acceptably ‘butch’ to take the term as 'authentic' and move on? Or is the word way too ‘frat boy’; deserving all the scorn the chattering class can muster?

I could throw around borderline slurs all day, but that's not the point. The point is communication and what gets lost when descriptive language gets a little too loose.

Gov. Mike Easley recently told a cheering crowd that Sen. Hillary Clinton's toughness makes Rocky Balboa look like a "pansy." The big news from that event should've been Easley's endorsement of Clinton for president. The questions should have focused on Easley's sway in the state and the endorsement's potential impact on the presidential race.

Instead, much of the media zeroed in on 'pansy.'

The comment itself wasn't all that surprising. Easley has identified himself as a "King of the Hill"-style Democrat, a nod to one of his favorite and an admittedly great television series. Easley says what he means, means what he says, keeps it simple, keeps it real. I swear, with my left hand on my lunch box, I get it.

Still, "pansy" – whether it’s a gay slur or a synonym for softie or both – became too much of a distraction. Taking on Uber-Republican Arnold Schwarzenegger (instead of blue collar champ Rocky) with a "girly-man" reference might have packed a smart political punch, but probably would’ve irked some. "Wimp" would've done just fine and has precedent. George H.W. Bush wrestled unsuccessfully (but man-fully) with the term through the final months of his one-term presidency.

Some bloggers are ripping Easley as a “bigot” for his word choice. His record suggests this is unfair. Moreover, the game of finger-pointing quickly becomes a house of mirrors. Does hurling the accusation of ‘bigot’ make you ‘knee-jerk’ and ‘politically correct’? If you get in a lather about ‘pansy,’ shouldn’t you also refuse to use its opposite number, ‘good ol’ boy’ (which, after all, is code in some circles for ‘backwards bigot,’ yes?).

See what I mean? Suddenly, the rational world of thinking, decision-making and explaining becomes a swirl of confusion, code and, finally, intellectual collapse.

When it comes to descriptive language, be smart about where and how to use it. I love hearing UNC system President Erskine Bowles talk about the “tsunami” of change coming to our economic landscape. It sweeps me up and makes me part of the cause. I hate – and I bet you do, too – hearing otherwise compelling messages muddled by words that push people out of a rational process and into the no-man’s/woman's/all-living-things' land of finger-pointing.