My first instinct was that the sweepstakes was a joke. It seemed such a cheesy idea, à la the Win a Date with Tad Hamilton! rom-com of a few years ago. However, it’s real, and continues through April 30.

That got me thinking — if women who are generally supportive of the president think this is a silly idea that tarnishes the presidential brand, what must the general response be? I dug further in Twitter, and while I saw many excited postings, and a lot of jokes, I also saw some who, like me, thought the competition belittled the dignity of the president as well as women voters:

I hate to see our political process turned into a joke. No matter how much I may disagree with some of their policies, I cringed at the public humiliation endured by the GOP candidates during their reality show-debates. For all that I thought President Obama’s appearance this week with Jimmy Fallon was funny, it still bothers me that he must stoop to “slow jam the news” to communicate with the younger electorate. When candidate Clinton played his saxophone on late-night TV, it was something he did for attention, but he pandered less to the public after his election. Watch the brilliant 1976 movie Network, so oddly prescient in its depiction of TV news as entertainment. What then seemed extreme is now the norm — the satire has become reality.

For more information on the reaction to the Clooney sweepstakes, I decided to use a software application from a Sterling client, Attensity, to pull top-line sentiment over five days. I pulled about about 17.5 million comments in social media, with discussion peaking at over six million comments on April 20,^, the day after the Clooney sweepstakes launch. The sentiment was more balanced than I expected, with positive reaction more than double the negative.

The Obama camp is lauded for its acumen in using social media and email to engage with supporters. In this case, though, I believe they’ve made a mistake: They’ve overused the new addresses they acquired through the sweepstakes. I registered for the contest; it was time I made another campaign contribution and hey, you never know! Since then, I’ve received an email every day asking me to chip in another donation in order to increase my chances of winning a ticket to the dinner. It doesn’t matter to me that some of the messages come in the name of the First Couple; if the frequency of communication does not diminish, I will unsubscribe — but only after winner notification on May 4^th!

When you launch a contest, you need to consider a number of things: What is your end goal for it? Is it to get people talking? To spur people into giving their contact information to expand your database of supporters? To secure donations? The real question is, “Are these people going to remain committed after the contest has finished?” Too often, they “like” your Facebook page or sign up to receive your newsletter only to get that free ticket or chance at an iPhone. Call them what you please but they are not true fans, friends or followers. They won’t recommend your product or service, or canvas potential voters.

In the case of the Obama-Clooney dinner, I venture to guess that many of the people who registered on the site will not turn into committed campaigners. They were attracted to the star combination, and once the event has passed, will hit “unsubscribe.” However, in the short term, the Clooney name has managed to grow the Obama 2012 database and bring in more donations, so can be touted as a success.

In summary:

1. Be sure that your contest is consistent with your brand image.
2. Recognize that many of your contest entrants are fair-weather followers, so be careful about making decisions based on the new subscriber base.
3. Be careful not to over-communicate, as incentive-focused subscribers will have a low threshold for messages.

Lisa Hawes can be reached at lhawes@sterlingpr.com. Follow Lisa on Twitter @lisakayhawes.

Jordan Hubert contributed the sentiment research for this article. Follow Jordan on Twitter at @jahubert.

Not only is the video from Dollar Shave Club creative and funny, but it encompasses nearly every quality one could want in a video (or pretty much any communications effort, for that matter): drives awareness to company, is cost-effective, clearly communicates the value of the product, and has a simple call to action.

Check out some of the other favorites we’ve come up with on our Creative Communications board on Pinterest. What are your favorites?

Amanda Hoffman can be reached at ahoffman@sterlingpr.com. Follow her on Twitter @hoffmandy.

Skittles and Arizona Iced Tea have both seen their sales increase as people use their products to help raise money and awareness for the Martin family. Many feel that Skittles and Arizona Iced Tea have a responsibility to take a stance but both companies have released statements essentially taking a hands off approach. Skittles said, ”We are deeply saddened by the news of Trayvon Martin’s death and express our sincere condolences to his family and friends,we also respect their privacy and feel it inappropriate to get involved or comment further as we would never wish for our actions to be perceived as an attempt of commercial gain following this tragedy.” Arizona Iced Tea soon followed with: “[We would like to] express our sincere sympathies to Trayvon’s family and friends. At this time, we will make no further comment as we wish to respect the family’s privacy and grieving time and feel it is inappropriate to become involved in a private family matter.”

These statements were not enough in the minds of those who have taken to Twitter in droves to tell Skittles and Arizona Iced Tea that they ought to donate the money they have made off of free advertising and Trayvon to help his family. It’s a slippery slope no matter how they play it, donate money and they could get criticized for it not being enough, talk about your brand and Trayvon and suddenly you are a corporate villain trying to capitalize on a tragedy, do nothing and you are greedy relishing in your new found profit. There are some groups who have called for a boycott on Skittles until the company agrees to take a stance and donate.

I think Skittles and Arizona Iced Tea made the right decision not to get directly involved even though they are caught in the cross hairs. Both companies were thrust into the middle of a giant controversy through no fault of their own and are simply doing everything they can to come out unscathed (not an uncommon problem, as we’ve seen before).

Monika Hathaway can be reached at mhathaway@sterlingpr.com. Follow her on Twitter @Jazzpatron

My "Mad Men" avatar, courtesy AMC

I am obsessed with the world of Sterling Cooper Draper Pryce. I even dressed up as an SCDP secretary for a Halloween party (and won third prize). In preparation for the fifth season of “Mad Men” beginning this Sunday night on AMC, I’ve watched the episodes again and despite the lack of surprise, I’ve enjoyed them even more than on my initial viewing. Without a need to focus on the storylines, I can spend more time admiring the exquisite production values, the labyrinthine script, and the subtle acting.

With my head in the 1960s, I’ve repeatedly drawn comparisons between life at the SCDP ad agency with my life at the Sterling Communications public relations agency, to the point where I decided to summarize my top lessons from Don Draper and his colleagues. No, I’m not talking about the boozing, harassment or eavesdropping —and no one has ever driven a lawn mower in one of our offices— but the lessons on client and employee relationships. Some things don’t change.

As a “spoiler alert,” I’ve ordered the lessons by season, and am paraphrasing the dialogue.

SEASON 1

Lesson 1: I was reviewing messaging of solar companies recently and noticed that one company describes their “waterproof solar mounting systems.” Aren’t they all waterproof? They go on your roof. Then I realized that it was an example of the messaging meeting Don had with Lucky Strike in the pilot episode:

“Lucky Strike. It’s toasted.”

“But all tobacco is toasted. Every one does it.”

“No, everyone else’s tobacco is poisonous. Lucky Strike’s is toasted. So you can own that message.”

How many times have I heard a similar conversation in messaging and positioning meetings? That conversation was spot on — and I was hooked on the show.

Lesson 2: After Peggy Olson was assigned to the Rejuvenator account, she dithered over asking for a salary raise until Don barked at her, “Don’t ever be afraid to ask for what you deserve.” That’s a good piece of advice, and as applicable in budget negotiations with clients as it is in salary discussions.

SEASON 2

Lesson 3: When Sterling Cooper lost its bid for American Airlines’ business because their contact had been fired, Don, surprisingly, took it in stride. Rather than bemoaning the lost effort, he consoled Duck Phillips by reminding him that their participation in the agency review had catapulted Sterling Cooper into a new league. Other companies would no longer regard them as a bit player. The entire episode rang true to anyone who’s worked in an agency, as we’ve all experienced opportunities that have evaporated due to a contact’s departure. You regret the lost opportunity, and then move on. On the positive side, you’re left with some good new collateral developed for the proposal.

Lesson 4: When Sterling Cooper merged with Putnam, Powell & Lowell, Duck talked about his vision for the new company. At the end of the speech, old Bert Cooper commented, “Not once in that speech did I hear mention of the client.” I was reminded of this when reading Greg Smith’s letter outlining his reasons for leaving Goldman Sachs, a letter strikingly similar in tone to Don Draper’s “Why I’m Quitting Tobacco” op-ed in Season 4. Smith was discouraged by Goldman’s laser focus on profits, sometimes at the expense of the client’s best interest. Whether it’s banking or advertising or public relations, if you’re in a service business, the client’s good should figure into every decision.

SEASON 3:

Lesson 5: When discussing her objection to the client’s wish for a shot-for-shot copy of the opening sequence of “Bye Bye Birdie” for a “Patio” drink ad, Peggy said, “Sometimes clients don’t know what they want. You need to tell them.” The attitude of her male counterpart was:  Whatever the client wants is fine. They’re paying. While that’s true, it’s the account person’s responsibility to present options and recommendations, not to be a yes-man or –woman. The client is paying for strategic counsel, and you should offer guidance.

SEASON 4:

Lesson 6: The executive team of Fillmore Auto Parts couldn’t agree on their strategy:  Did they wish to appeal to professional mechanics, or to the DIY Everyman?  Don impatiently told them to come to a decision while he left the room on personal business. As he exited, one of the clients could be heard to ask, “Why do we have to please him?” I could understand the frustration felt on both sides. They did need to agree and were wasting the account team’s time, but Don treated them in a condescending way that was not respectful. They were the clients and were paying for Don’s time, not the other way around.

What about you?  What’s your favorite life lesson or work tip from Don, Peggy, Pete and the rest of the gang?

If you want to celebrate the return of “Mad Men,” the San Jose Mercury News published some tips for hosting the ultimate 1960s-era cocktail party. I’ll have an Old Fashioned and a bowl of Chex Mix, please. Don’t forget to “Mad Men Yourself” on the AMC website — see my avatar above!

Lisa Hawes can be reached at lhawes@sterlingpr.com. Follow Lisa on Twitter @lisakayhawes.

He may not see it that way, but no reasonable person can hear or read the misrepresentations and outright fabrications in his stage act, “The Agony and the Ecstasy of Steve Jobs,” without concluding that he has a problem with the truth. A rather big one.

Daisey’s veil of lies was ripped to tatters when he allowed the NPR program “This American Life” to air an excerpt of his stage play earlier this year. Asked direct questions by the program’s producers about the details of his polemic, Daisey could have easily admitted that he embellished and fabricated certain facts and events and that would have been that.  The show wouldn’t have broadcast and he wouldn’t have come under the journalistic scrutiny that ultimately (albeit somewhat tardily) revealed his falsehoods. Instead, Daisey doubled down and vouched for the authenticity of his “facts,” even going so far as to invent new lies  to make it harder for the program’s producers to independently verify his story.

It all came apart when the China business correspondent for American Public Media’s Marketplace, Rob Schmitz, noticed inconsistencies between Daisey’s alleged experience and what the correspondent himself had seen in the course of his own reporting. So Schmitz decided to do some digging. It quickly became obvious that Daisey simply couldn’t have experienced some of the things he claimed to have seen and heard first-hand. And the details of some of his stories bore a striking resemblance to news reports of incidents that happened thousands of miles from the factories Daisey claimed to have visited. It just didn’t add up.

Because it wasn’t true.  In a startling and painful retraction segment last weekend, This American Life’s host Ira Glass tried to get at the root of why Daisey lied. Daisey hems and haws, offers a half-hearted apology, cops to being afraid of the reaction if people knew he was dissembling, talks about art versus journalism, of a desire to provoke an emotional response in his audience in the service of a greater truth. Ultimately Daisey argues that it’s OK for him to lie because his purpose is noble.

Daisey goes further with this line in a couple of  posts on his own blog. Apparently immune to irony, he even hints that the retraction segment on This American Life was creatively edited to make him look worse.  It’s … infuriating.

That Daisey thinks his lies are excusable because he is attempting to shed light on an often-overlooked problem – the harsh working conditions endured by many Chinese factory workers – is beside the point. That he characterizes his lies as “dramatic license” is convenient and equally irrelevant. What matters is that Daisey lied – and continues to lie – to US, to his audience, to the people whose sympathy he is trying to gain. He lies because he doesn’t trust us with the truth. And because the truth is complex, messy and not at all conducive to simple, black and white storytelling about good vs. evil, wealth vs. poverty, or corporate greed vs. basic human rights.

Then there’s the simple unfairness of his screed. At one point in his monologue, Daisey claims to have met a 13 year old girl and her friends outside of a factory. He quotes her as saying that not just she, but lots of underage workers are employed building Apple products. Then he asks the audience a rhetorical question: “Do you really think Apple doesn’t know?”

The implication, of course, is that Apple does not just callously disregard the deplorable working conditions in the factories that make its products but essentially condones the use of child labor. They are not just tolerating this illegal activity, but complicit in it. It’s a serious charge. If true, it’s a black mark not just on Apple’s brand but on the very integrity of the people who run the company.

And once again, Daisey lies. He met no such underage workers. He channels his inner Stephen Glass and simply makes them up. For the story. For the cause.

He uses fake people to impugn the very real reputations of Apple executives. Never mind that Apple is considered a leader in pushing its foreign suppliers and partners to improve working conditions. Or that, long before Daisey came along,  the company published its own reports on working conditions and child labor violations and its efforts to eliminate them. All that matters is Daisey’s narrative. Facts be damned.

The thing is, despite his protestations to the contrary, Daisey’s lies will hurt his cause. People tend to turn their backs on those who dupe them, to be skeptical when somebody cries wolf. The next person who comes forward with criticisms about Chinese factory working conditions will have to bear the weight of Daisey’s lies. They’ll have to overcome a wariness that we’ve heard it all before. And it wasn’t true.

Lies in the service of the truth are still lies. They don’t serve the truth so much as they obscure it. Ultimately, they diminish us all.

Kevin Pedraja can be reached at kpedraja@sterlingpr.com. Follow him on Twitter @kpedraja.

Today on Sound Off, Sterling’s semi-regular podcast series, Kevin Pedraja and Lisa Hawes discuss the media firestorm ignited by this and a spate of recent public resignations. What are the dangers posed to companies when employees use traditional and now, social, media to air their grievances? What lessons can be learned? All this and more in eight minutes.

So what exactly is corporate identity theft? Well, it’s exactly like it sounds, a fake business poses as a legitimate business to get access to credit lines or poach customers. They look alike, stealing corporate logos; they sound alike, mimicking services and using text from the website; they tap into existing credit and reputation to poach customers and make purchases with corporate cards. They can change business contact information to apply for new cards and then skip town before the bill ever arrives. Corporate identity theft is even more dangerous if the fraudulent company mimics a company offering in-home services such as pest control, plumbing, or locksmithing because then they can gain access to your customers’ home. Your customers won’t know that it isn’t you and your company’s reputation will take the hit for their poor services.

How is this possible? Well like most things, identity theft was made possible by the internet. With so many purchases now being made online, it’s easy to defraud customers and appear as a legitimate business without having a to set up physical store. The easiest way to set up a faux business is to falsify documents from a dissolved business to make it appear as though that business is up and running again. This works especially well with businesses dissolved under positive circumstances rather than one that was closed due to bankruptcy.

What can you do if it happens to you? Really, it’s all about prevention. Since you don’t want to deal with the fall out, it is always better to make sure it never happens. Here are some steps you can take to protect your corporation’s identity:

• Manage your data – protect what information you release and know what information others have posted and where to find it.
• Protect the content on your website – hackers can easily replicate webpages and steal logos if no steps are taken to prevent it.
• Educate your employees against potential threats – if they don’t know the risks they cannot properly protect themselves from phishing attacks. You should have a security system in place which could be a simple as the way each employee signs emails. Usually phishing emails are sent to people with decision and purchasing power and look as though they came from somebody legitimate inside an organization like an HR person. Once the email is opened a virus is activated that allows “back door” entry  into the company’s data.
• Protect your customers -  web-based scams target your customers by sending targeted people emails asking them to visit a replica website and prompting them to divulge personal information. Send them an email informing them of the potential risk and advise them not to give out personal information.
• Keep corporate documents on hand – you are going to need these in the event that your identity is stolen. Lack of documentation makes it hard to prove your case.

Taking preventative measures is the best way to ensure that corporate identity theft doesn’t happen to you, but incase it does here are some steps to take:

• Contact authorities immediately – contacting the authorities as well as your legal council will ensure that all evidence is properly preserved so you have the best shot of winning your case and making an insurance claim.
• Inform your customers – the moment you suspect something fishy, alert your customers to potential phishing attacks. If you are an in-home service provider, arm them against the threat of having a stranger enter their home by giving them a way to identify the serviceman as a fake. This could be as simple as providing ID cards to your employees.
• Don’t panic – the best decisions are made with a level head.

Monika Hathaway can be reached at mhathaway@sterlingpr.com. Follow her on Twitter @Jazzpatron

This is why I was surprised when I recently attended a forum presented by my PR group in San Francisco, the PR Divas, where a panel of professionals discussed what they looked for when they hired a PR consultant/agency. Their top concern was not industry expertise, but trust.

Trust? This trumps industry expertise and results? Now that I think about it, it makes sense to me that clients would value honest feedback, even if it isn’t positive. They want to know what’s going wrong when campaigns aren’t working out, and why the media doesn’t love their story. The four women in the panel each explained that while industry expertise was a plus, it wasn’t THE deciding factor for them. More important was a connection with a sincere individual whose track record proved they would work hard and get results, while being upfront and straightforward. The women all admitted to being more likely to hire people they have worked with before or have past business relationships with. The paramount concern for them was to work with someone who would not only be successful, but also had a good working chemistry with them.

Understanding this makes me feel like I might take a slightly different approach to new business pitches. Although each client will vary on what they are looking for when hiring PR pros, it’s interesting that all four women on this panel valued trust above industry expertise.

Do you think a panel of men or a mixed panel would have different results? What’s your top qualifier when hiring a public relations consultant/agency?

Lisette Rauwendaal can be reached at lisette@sterlingpr.com. Follow her on Twitter @lisette.