Eric Bledsoe to the Timberwolves? Not likely this year...

With the FIBA World Championships over and NBA training camps starting in a few days, there's been a bit of a gap in the news department for NBA fans. So when it came out that the Minnesota Timberwolves were exploring options to acquire Eric Bledsoe in a sign and trade from the Phoenix Suns, the basketball world's collective heads turned and took notice.

Bledsoe is convinced that he is a max-offer type of player. Whether you agree with this or not (I wholeheartedly do not agree), the two sides are apparently pretty far apart in negotiations. The Phoenix Suns offered four years and 48 million dollars. This would help maintain cap flexibility for a young team that played well in the second half of the season and has hopes to crack the playoffs in the west this year. Bledsoe, however, wants a max deal which would pay him 64 million over four years. Neither side intends to yield ground and it has been widely assumed that Bledsoe will sign the qualifying offer and become a unrestricted free agent next year.

But in came the Timberwolves, who have already made a substantial number of moves this summer, saying that they're engaging with the Suns in a sign and trade deal for Bledsoe. This just seems like quite a bit of smoke and no fire to me. The Suns aren't going to let Bledsoe go for anything less than an all-star in return and I am sure that the Timberwolves know this. But now the Timberwolves will definitely be on Bledsoe's radar later in the season and/or next summer if Phoenix doesn't find a suitable deal during the season. This was never about making it happen now. It was about later in the year.

The Timberwolves aren't in any rush to resign Ricky Rubio and many speculate that the organization may not be as in love with him as they were just two years ago. By making noise about Bledsoe and pushing a max offer his way, Minnesota has purposely shown its hand and revealed just how serious it is about making Bledsoe its starting point guard in 2015. It is a move that makes great sense for them as an organization and I think that they made a great decision to start planting the seeds in Bledsoe's mind now. A max contract for him is still a little rich for my blood, but it would be hard to argue with a Wiggins and Bledsoe combo.

LeBron & Woods Swoosh Art Will Likely Land Artist Additional Work

Well, Andy Gellenberg may just land himself some additional business after pulling together pieces of art consisting only of Nike swooshes that make up the faces of LeBron James, Tiger Woods and Paul Rodriguez. To say that they are impressive would be an absolute understatement and I highly recommend that you check them out in the link above.

The German artist shows just how effective simplicity can be in advertising and I wouldn't be surprised if he picked up some ad copy work as a result of these pieces. Kudos to him for a really great project.

Of course, I am sure that Nike doesn't mind the free press at all.

The Arby's Meat Mountain - A Well-Executed PR Campaign

Anyone who has been on the internet in the last two weeks has seen or heard about the new Arby's Meat Mountain - a Frankenstein concoction of greasy meats that would make even Joey Chestnut think twice before attacking it.

Seriously, look at that thing. I felt my heart skip a beat when I laid eyes on it. Image credit: CBS Chicago

Arby's claimed that this off-the-menu item only became an internet phenomenon as more consumers stated hearing about it and demanding its official existence. That this would become an organic request from customers isn't an entirely shocking way for the Meat Mountain to be put on the menu. When I worked at Jamba Juice, there were so many "secret" smoothies that customers would order that we ultimately had official recipes for all of them. I would go to random Jamba's around Portland to see if I could get the same ones and, sure enough, they all made them the same way. 

With this in mind, it wouldn't shock me if this was something that a few customers asked for, told their friends about and unintentionally started a grassroots effort to make the Meat Mountain an official Arby's sandwich. Customer is always right in the service industry, right?

Slate's L.V. Anderson didn't seem to think that this was an organic request from consumers, but, rather, a well-orchestrated PR campaign from Arby's that the company planted in a few strategic areas and watched the story go viral. She essentially concludes that it does look like that there was some organic demand for the sandwich, but that Arby's likely played a big part in pushing it forward.

Going off that premise, this is one hell of a job from the Arby's PR team. I am willing to bet that they heard from a few stores that said customers were requesting this and they saw an opportunity to turn it into a full-blown campaign. Landing pieces in major outlets across the country over a two week period is the definition of viral. The sandwich had its own hashtag on Twitter for a day or two.

Companies are always looking to take a campaign or story viral. It is enough to make a PR person's eyes roll so hard that they freeze. That response is generally warranted because what it takes for a story to go viral these days is still a bit of a mystery. There are certain elements of a viral campaign that will be essential for companies to have in place, but, at the end of the day, if customers don't take up the cause then the campaign will fall flat on its face. A lot of times it is dumb luck what catches on and what doesn't. But a company can help propel a campaign to viral status if it takes off with the public initially.

Arby's executed particularly well on a couple of tactics that helped the Meat Mountain really explode. First, they let the customers have control of the creation. As a consumer, if I hear that this product is being pushed solely by the company, it's motivations are obvious - sales and greater revenue. But since this demand and request for the sandwich came from the consumer and Arby's then gave in and added it to the menu, it gave it authenticity that wouldn't have existed from a traditional introduction. Putting the power in the hands of the consumer is a risky strategy, but it can pay huge dividends ultimately.

Second, Arby's let the buzz build for a while before it really addressed the sandwich. The company was fairly mum on it when it first started appearing across social channels and eyes slowly started turning towards them on when they would officially respond. Arby's timed its response well and extended the news cycle around the sandwich, which is no small feat when we're talking about fast food.

Third, they played the hero by giving the customer what they wanted. Obviously Arby's had to do cost-profit analysis to make sure that this sandwich made sense for them, but that's not how it is presented when the company "gives in" to the consumer demand. It demonstrates that the company values its customer base's opinion and is committed to making the sandwiches that they want to eat, gimmicky or not.

Sure, this campaign was a little too smooth and effective to have simply been organically created, but who cares? Arby's PR team should treat themselves to a steak dinner to celebrate because they earned it.

Nike Just Made Kevin Durant A Very, Very Rich Man

Can't blame Under Armour for the attempt, at least.

The company offered Kevin Durant a ten year deal that would pay him more than $260 million dollars over that time in an effort to steal away one of the most valuable pieces of Nike's army of athletes. Unfortunately for Under Armour, Nike had a clause in Durant's original contract that would allow them to match any offer from a competitor. I sure hope that lawyer who included that clause in the contract got a nice bonus as a result.

Nike, unsurprisingly, decided to match the offer. While Under Armour bet the house by going after Durant, resigning him was an absolute no-brainer for Nike. Under Armour is certainly going to make Nike pay a little more than it was hoping - reports were that Nike offered an initial deal that would pay Durant only $20 million - the Swoosh really only had one choice in the situation.

Some experts speculated that the steep price may keep Nike from resigning Durant. They already boast the biggest collection of valuable marketing assets in the world when it comes to basketball, so if they had to let one go, it wouldn't be the end of the world. But Nike is smart enough to know that while shelling out a little extra money may hurt the bottom line at the end of the day, keeping the third most recognizable basketball player in the world (LeBron and Kobe being #1 & #2, respectively) under their contract and not a major competitor like Under Armour is critical for future success.

Under Armour is trying to break into the basketball market that long has been held by Nike and Adidas. It recently picked up Steph Curry as an endorser, but it knows that it needs to land a whale in order to really make a splash. That's why the aggressive move to go after Durant made sense. It would give them immediate credibility and open up the company to greater international reach, somewhere where the company has lagged behind Nike and Adidas, especially in basketball.

But I would not be surprised if Nike was prepared months earlier for a massive bid and simply needed to see exactly how much it would cost the company. Because at the end of the day, this really won't cost Nike too much. Durant's signature shoes fly off the shelves. As long as he continues to perform at the same level he has, which following an unbelievable MVP season isn't unlikely, those shoes will keep selling and Nike will keep stacking cash.

Sure, $300 million is no small amount. But Nike has proven time and time again that it makes the most out of every single dollar it puts into sponsorships. The company's marketing panache practically ensures that they'll get ridiculous ROI from Durant. And, perhaps more importantly, it's left a competitor empty-handed and pondering the next big move it must make to take on the king.

Tips for internal communications at a PR agency

In the short time that I have been in the PR field, I've found that sometimes, unfortunately, PR people can be some of the worst when it comes to communications. We become so wrapped up in serving our clients that we lose track of how we conduct business internally.

One of the areas that is frequently overlooked is how we handle internal communications. It should be a safe assumption that those who specialize in communicating with external audiences would have no issues communicating with each other. But that would make both me and you an ass.

When there are changes or developments taking place within an agency, generally the first thought becomes what effects they will have on the clients. This is a reasonable thought process given that PR agencies depend on the clients they serve. This can become the spotlight, however, and push aside the issue of addressing your own workforce. But missing out on this critical step can reduce the trust between management and the rest of the company.

Many of the same rules for external communications apply when distributing news across internal teams:

Be as transparent as possible: there is no catch-all for how much information you should divulge to your teams, but I believe in erring on the side of as much detail as possible where possible. If you don't present enough facts, rumors will develop and spread faster than a wildfire. Identifying the key points that you can share with limited repercussions is a good place to start.

Roll out any communications by level accordingly: while transparency is extremely important, understanding that some discretion for who learns the news when will help with message control. Start with management and work your way down. This will also make sure that teams can find out directly from their managers, rather than other teams or executives that they do not personally know.

Move quickly: this one also has to do with message control. Just as with any type of communications, you want to be the one who sets the dialogue's course. Emphasize the most important points, but don't ignore or deflect the tough questions. If these are not answered at the start, it may appear that you're hiding facts.

Consider the medium: depending on the news and the size of the agency, it may make sense to simply send out an email. Other issues will call for an in-person meeting or video conference. Before executing on a plan, think carefully about what medium will be most likely to foster a healthy discussion and create trust between you and the workforce.

One of the most important things to remember when communicating internally is that there is no one-size-fits-all approach. We don't (or, at least, shouldn't) do a cookie cutter approach for our clients and we shouldn't use one for ourselves. Plans should be made in advance, when possible, to outline the objectives, strategies and tactics for your internal communications platform. As with most parts of this job, having a framework prepared ahead of time will help expedite this process. 

Don't get caught with your pants around your ankles. Or your first step will leave you flat on your face and your workforce wondering what the hell just happened. 

TTBG #7 - The service industry is not a punching bag

There are very few things in this world that irritate me as much as when I see an individual being rude to a waiter, bartender, server, cashier or any other of the almost 120k service industry employees in the United States today.

The sense of entitlement that I have seen from some individuals and groups is downright disrespectful. Yes, when you go out to eat or order something like ice cream, you are paying for the service in addition to the product that you receive (note: if you argue that you are just paying for the product and are therefore exempt from something like tipping at dinner, please, show yourself the door). And with this exchange of goods comes a certain level of congeniality from the service provider that we have come to expect.

Unfortunately, some people seem to think that they deserve greater amounts of respect than the average customer. Some don't see the value of reciprocating this respect. Many don't even bother attempting to hide their blatant disinterest in the service employee.

This is not what a gentleman does.

A good rule of thumb that I abide by is to treat any service employee with the same amount of respect that I would a friend of a friend. If I am out to a restaurant, I have either been there before or have an interest in it. The server/host/waiter then becomes an extension of the restaurant. Just as I am willing to give the restaurant a chance, I will give their employees one too.

This is the same of a friend of a friend. I have a direct relationship with my friend and I will extend that same level of respect to his friend as I would him. Odds are that you may never see your friend's friend again, but you certainly do not want to cause any problems or leave a negative image lasting in his mind. This should be the same mentality when speaking with individuals in the service industry.

I'm not saying that you need to become best friends with every cashier, waiter or teenage ice cream scooper you encounter. Nor am I saying that you don't have a right to be upset if an order is mistaken or you are treated rudely. This is strictly for your first interactions with the individuals. Treating these employees with respect from the onset will leave a lasting impression on that individual, as well as any others around you, and that's what a gentleman does.

TTBG #6: Matching Your Leathers
TTBG #5: Thankful All Through The Year
TTBG #4: Hats Are For Outside, Not The Restaurant

Damian Lillard cut from team USA and I'm okay with it

Team USA made its final cuts just ahead of the FIBA World Championships and the last of those who missed the cut were Gordon Hayward, Chandler Parsons, Kyle Korver and Damian Lillard.

As a Portland Trail Blazers fan, my first instinct is to be upset about Lillard getting cut. I understand why he was since it was essentially between him and Kyrie for the final point guard spot. There was no chance that either Derrick Rose or Steph Curry got the axe. So between Irving and Lillard, one had to go. I think that you can make a strong argument for either point guard deserving the nod, but Irving certainly benefitted from Mike Kryzewski and his Duke connection. Regardless, team USA enters the tournament with a host of offensive options with Rose, Curry and Irving as the ball handlers.

Now, I am sure that many Blazer fans are upset about team USA's decision. But when I stop and think about it, I'm strangely okay with it. First, the World Championships are not the Olympics. While they certainly have a degree of prestige, at the end of the day, I care significantly more about team USA bringing home the gold at the Olympics than I do at the World Championships. Most countries do not field their A teams at the World Championships (case in point, team USA), so while winning is exciting, it certainly isn't an indication of the best basketball country in the world. Sure, it would be great to have seen Lillard don a USA jersey, but I have much less invested as a USA fan in the World Championships.

The other main reason that I'm okay with Lillard missing the team is tied to the above: I would rather see Lillard get the additional rest in the months of August and September before heading into the NBA season in October. The Blazers will have to battle through the Western Conference, which is deeper now than it has ever been, for 82 games before hitting the playoffs. Lillard is only entering his third year and last year was his first in the playoffs. It is tough to stay sharp for 90+ games of an NBA season, especially after playing competitively through the summer months, and I'd bet that he can attest to that after the Spurs series in May.

My interest level for team USA at the World Championships is definitely lower than that of my interest in seeing the Blazers make an extended run in the playoffs in 2015. Lillard already got some of the benefits of practicing and playing with team USA and I hope that he absorbed what it really looks like on the most elite level. He's made incredible strides as a player, but he can still achieve a great deal more, especially on the defensive end.

I'd like to see Lillard take his experience in this winning culture and bring it back to the Blazers. Aldridge is the unquestioned leader of this team, but there's no doubt that Lillard made his mark on this franchise. Use the cut as motivation because now the Blazers' expectations are higher. The competition is more fierce. And I want my point guard fully ready to go on day one, even if it means missing out on team USA.

Tired of ALS Ice Bucket Challenge? Let's Keep Some Perspective

By now, the only living things on Earth that haven't seen the ice bucket challenge are the penguins in the North and South Poles. It's a viral phenomenon that has been going on on the international scale for well over a month at this point. You can't open your Facebook, Twitter, Vine, any news website, turn on the TV or even open an email without being reminded that its momentum hasn't slowed.

Of course, as to be expected, this has led a large group of vocal detractors to express their irritation with the cause. Lots of people just do it for the attention. Many don't have any idea what ALS is. People do the challenge but don't donate any money. It's run its course. It is a one-time thing that people will forget about and likely never donate again.

Fine, we get it. Not everyone is a fan. I can even understand that many people look past the fact that it has raised more than $41 million for ALS research. You're tired of it and waiting for the fad to pass. Waiting for stories to stop appearing on the New York Times, USA Today, CNN, Buzzfeed, Mashable, so that your life can just go back to normal and not feel like it is being crammed down your throat.

While listening to NPR this morning on my walk to work, the first story reported on the horrific riots and protests in Ferguson. The next story was about the unspeakably evil acts of ISIL and James Foley. The story after that was on the Ebola outbreak in Liberia, which has gotten so bad that the government has quarantined off an entire village of 80,000 people for fear of the disease spreading further. Next story talked about how Hamas had shot more than 120 rockets at Israel and Israel responded with more than 100 air-strikes in the two days since the 72-hour cease fire broke. Then a story on Russia sending unauthorized trucks into Ukraine, another escalation in the already delicate area.

That's just what was covered in the twenty minutes it took me to get to my desk.

In case you haven't noticed, there's quite a bit of turmoil in the world right now. This summer, in particular, has been filled with enough negative stories to fill an entire calendar year. We're bombarded with stories of violence, political unrest, disease and murder that if you stop and try to digest all of the horror that takes place on a weekly basis, you'll end up like AJ at the end of the Sopranos.

So excuse me if I feel the need to tell all those who are sick of the Ice Bucket Challenge to simply shut up and let it ride itself out of the public's eye. It has been about the only incredibly positive story that we have had over the last few weeks. One month from now it'll be gone. But the crisis in the Middle East, the Russia-Ukraine conflict, partisan politics in the US and every act of rape, murder and general violence will still be around us.

The next time you groan about a story on the Ice Bucket Challenge, just consider the alternatives of what the news could cover. Or what your friends could be talking about. It should give you a change of heart.

Do As You Say And As You Do: Protecting A PR Agency's Reputation

In "An Ideal Husband," Oscar Wilde wrote: The only good thing to do with good advice is pass it on; it is never of any use to oneself.

Sometimes in the world of PR, this would seem to be the mentality we adhere to the most. We spend all day talking with clients about what we believe is the best route for them to take, giving justification after justification for that choice. We look at the situation from every angle possible before making a recommendation. Pros and cons are weighed. Audiences are examined. Every plan is crafted carefully, strategically shaped and efficiently executed.

A penny for our thoughts? Well, a little more than a penny, but we're always happy to share with you what we believe the best course of action is for your business.

Sometimes it appears that we listen too closely to Wilde's words and do not seem to examine issues that face our agency each day in the same manner we do our clients. We are so intent on providing the best possible course of action for them that we will miss out on our own good advice when it comes to how we shape the public's perception of the agency.

Edelman, the world's largest public relations agency in the world (disclosure: Edelman is a big competitor with my own agency, Burson-Marsteller), found itself in a bit of hot water this past week when it circulated a blog on how clients could capitalize on media coverage around Robin Williams' death. As a PR practitioner, I understand what their thought process was, but the quick posting, the sensitivity of the topic and the clearly universal respect the public had for Williams should have been red flags at every turn. Edelman ultimately apologized for the blog post, but the damage was already done. Media outlets and the public soundly condemned the post and Edelman took a beating in the press for a few days.

Couple that with a recent gaffe on the agency's refusal to pledge that it would not work with climate change deniers and Edelman needed a little bit of crisis communications work for itself. Its executives did not adhere to the same advice they provide clients on a daily basis. The internal processes that we urge clients to put in place fell by the wayside and Edelman ultimately took two black eyes in as many weeks.

And while any PR expert wants to catch these issues before they get out of hand, Edelman took the appropriate response and has formed a team to examine reputation management for the agency itself. Executives recognized the missteps they made and are working to correct the issues. Swallowing pride like this and admitting mistakes is a critical step when it comes to crisis management and likely one of the first that Edelman recommends to its own clients. 

I can attest that as an individual who works in an agency, we can easily to lose sight of what is best for it. Following the advice that you give to clients can seem like a no-brainer, but when work is moving a million miles an hour, it can be the first mentality to disappear. Most people probably would think of a PR agency as the last company that would need to work on its external communications strategy, but we are human, too, and make mistakes. 

At the end of the day, agencies must remember that just like we handle for our clients, our reputation management must be considered at all times too. We must employ the same process of of decision-making that we're paid to give to our clients. Otherwise, we lose the credibility we work so hard to develop in their eyes.

Florida State Joins The Ranks Of Twitter Failures

Social media screw-ups happen. So frequently, in fact, that it takes some pretty spectacularly bad ones to even generate news around them. And the one social platform that seemingly causes the most problems for communicators is Twitter. In particular, the dangerous concept of a tweet chat.

So it should come as no surprise that today's lesson in what not to do comes from Florida State who decided that when you have a high-profile athlete who was the center of a questionable police investigation of a potential rape and was recently caught stealing crab legs from a local restaurant, the best thing to do is hold a tweet chat for all to have the opportunity to ask what's on their mind. And while these types of social media activities are likely never actually conducted by athlete, but rather a communications team member filtering the responses, a high-profile athlete like Jameis Winston isn't exactly the sharp-minded athlete you want taking on a horde of trolls.

Sure enough, the entire stream of tweets sarcastically asked about the aforementioned run-ins with the law. It certainly wasn't as big of a failure as some of the other social media debacles I've blogged about in the past (Robin Thicke, NCAA, McDonalds, Walgreens, JP Morgan), but I just fail to see how you decide to relinquish so much control of the conversation when it involves such a polarizing subject.

One easy alternative to a Twitter chat that still gives the audience the impression that it is engaging with the athlete is to simply have them send questions to an email address and do a virtual Q&A for an article to be pushed out across owned channels. This prevents trolls from taking over the hashtag and derailing the conversation. The event can still be promoted the week before across all social channels, but by making the questions private, you have control over what is posted and what isn't for all the public to see.

I get that an email Q&A with the fans may not be quite as sexy as a tweet chat. I also think that there is some argument to be made about giving up control of the narrative sometimes to help your audience shape it. But if I am managing communications at Florida State, I'm going to be significantly more careful with how I use Jameis Winston. Because it shouldn't take a rocket scientist to know that Winston has had his fair share of very negative press to match his positive.

Robin Thicke Falls Victim to Twitter Trolls

I want to preface this post by saying that I don't like Robin Thicke. I think he is a colossal tool who wouldn't understand the concept of sexism if it repeatedly stomped on his balls - which wouldn't be the worst thing in the world for the human race. With my personal bias clearly stated and out of the way, let's all take a second to laugh at how inept he, his team, and VH1 are when it comes to social media.

I have outlined the potential perils of social media in the past, usually when it comes to Twitter chats. I am by no means a social media expert. I don't claim to be one. But anyone with even a lobotomized brain would know that hosting a Tweet chat with Robin Thicke would be like throwing a gazelle to a pack of lions and telling them to play nice.

So clearly the lack-of-brain-trust that pulled together the Tweet chat with the hashtag #AskThicke had something else in mind when they organized this. But, in a move that surprised absolutely nobody, their plans went awry when Twitter users flooded the Tweet chat with questions about Thicke's misogyny, future rape-baiting hits he has planned and generally what makes him such a clown. The team running the chat lost control within the first few minutes.

Some of the best Tweets:

• Is the creepy stalking thing a sick publicity stunt at your ex's expense, or just a thoughtless grab for attention and relevance?#AskThicke
• When you ask "I know you want it", one presumes you are talking about an STD? #askThicke
• What does it feel like to be an icon for sexism, predatory behaviour and sexual assault? #AskThicke

And that's just the tip of the iceberg.

Even though I have outlined some other fails on my blog before, I think that this one has to jump to the top of the list for "worst social media blunders ever."

The moral of the story is this: when you are planning any kind of social media activity, you must consider all of the potential ways it could get out of control. When you open these conversations up to the public, you run the risk of other parties taking charge of the situation. Carefully weigh whether or not the return from the activation is greater than the risk. If it is even close, identify a new strategy.

Blink and You'll Miss Your Career Development

It has been a little more than two years since I started my first day with Burson-Marsteller right out of college. I had held four internships prior to that job, been working during the summers since I was a sophomore in high school and had long been doing odd jobs throughout my life. Little did I know that during all of those summers and those internships, I was reinforcing critical work skills and ethic that would pay dividends down the road.

One of the funny things I found out about internships is that you always feel like you are learning. And you probably are. But most of the time it is getting into the routine of that work environment, tackling the tasks that your superiors delegate, and simply keeping your mistakes to a minimum. They almost always have an end date and when I would reach my last day, I always felt like I grew leaps and bounds as a worker. I never had to worry about hitting a growth wall because I would hit my last day first.

I wasn't wrong for thinking that. All of that investment of time and effort when I was younger has reflected as I continue my journey as an employee. Lately, however, it sure seems like the growing and learning has slowed to a pedestrian pace.

When you are first starting out, everything is new and it is all a potential learning experience. Even the first few months I was at Burson, I found myself gobbling up every new opportunity that came my way, sometimes even to the detriment of my other work as I was overburdened with tasks. But after a few months, those same tasks that were once tantalizingly mysterious had become so mundane that I often wondered if I was wasting my time where I was.

I started to become frustrated with the projects that my managers assigned to me. They were the same projects I was working on this time last year. Hell, some of the projects were the same ones that I was working on the year before that when I first started. How in the world was I going to keep moving up in this world if year after year looked like Groundhog's Day?

As an intern, your starting base is zero. Every lesson, mistake, success, and utter failure is filed away into a repository to draw from the next day. Soon that repository becomes so full that every moment at work becomes a smaller percentage of the total number of influential events at work. The growth seemingly stops and you're left to wonder "Is now the right time to move on?"

The past two weeks I had been working on pulling together a report for one of my clients. It was a recap of the company's biggest event of the year. The report was the culmination of several months of work for the client and for us as agency. Now, I had done reports like these before and practically in my sleep. This was just a slightly larger one and for a more important event.

As I spent an hour of my day today scanning through the report for any errors, I found myself dropping a bucket into my well of knowledge that contained all of my past mistakes. I picked out the errors that I found and sent the report to my director. Usually when this step happens, I wait for an hour and address whatever corrections she has at that time. It is the way that it always goes. No matter how hard I try, there will always be mistakes.

While I waited for her to review the document, I started to think about the whole process of pulling the report together. It required me to work closely with the client, coordinating its global teams, managing a small team, and managing up with those above me. It started to dawn on me that while this was a report that I had done before in the past, the situation wasn't the same.

If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, it's probably a duck. But that just wasn't the case this time. Because what it looks like on the surface isn't always what you glean. Career development is funny like that. I was frustrated because I thought that I was stuck in a black hole of monotony. But what I failed to realize is that my job was changing more slowly than in the beginning because my well had finally overflowed and needed to move elsewhere. Every drop became that much smaller of a proportion.

I kept learning at the same rate that I did as an intern. The key is to recognize it, appreciate the growth or the shortcoming, and categorize it for use on a later date. Just like the first time I was assigned a report like this, there was a different set of circumstances than the last time. I drew from those experiences and adjusted accordingly. It looked like a duck, swam like a duck, and quacked like a duck, but it was most certainly something else.

My director emailed me back. No edits. Just a good job and her asking me to send it directly to the client. I sat back in my chair and dropped this lesson into my new and larger well.

Another Day, Another Social Media Screw-up - Delta Airlines Edition

I have taken a look at some pretty terrible social media screw-ups on my blog in the past and every time I write about it, I always think to myself that it has to be the last time that we will see a major brand botch it badly. Enough articles outlining various social media failures exist at this point that we could create an entire Encyclopedia Britannica of what not to do when engaging with the public on social media.

But, thankfully for us, and much to the chagrin of communications managers everywhere, companies like Delta Airlines still exist and somehow find new ways to remind us that social media is always just a little more complicated than it needs to be.

After the US beat Ghana 2-1 on Monday night, Delta decided that this was an appropriate tweet to send out:

Twitter quickly pointed out that there are, in fact, no giraffes in Ghana. This issue could have been solved if the social media team had taken a collective thirty seconds to Google whether or not giraffes were in the country. Here, let me do it for you.

Sure, everyone wants to be part of discussions on current events. We get that and accept that it must be done. But if you are going to do it, then why stray from the safest possible tweet?

The team should have stopped and asked themselves several questions:

• Will adding the image enhance the tweet in any way? 

I know that tweets with images are more engaged with on Twitter, but did Delta really think that would be the case here? Legitimate question - how is this tweet improved with an image? You can't add an image to a tweet every time and expect it to be better. Show some discretion and pick your spots.

• Okay, let's go with an image. What two images represent these countries? 

Gee, I don't know, what is arguably the biggest thing that the average person uses to identify foreign countries? A flag. The country's flag. Why are you making this harder than it needs to be? You don't stand to gain anything really by being part of this, but you sure as heck stand to lose by doing it incorrectly.

• Why are we selecting these images?

Again, a question so simple and, yet, nobody seemed to have asked it. Because if they had, the group would have Googled whether giraffes are in Ghana and decided to go a different route.

If you clearly don't have your ducks in a row, sometimes it is better to just sit a few plays out than put yourself in a potentially compromising position. And that's a lesson that Delta is learning the hard way.

Your Disinterested-In-Soccer Trolling Tweets Are Grating

Clint Dimpsey scored a goal yesterday in the first 30 seconds of the US's World Cup yesterday. I am pretty sure that the sound waves of the exaltations combined with the jumping up and down may have caused a minor earthquake throughout the entire nation. It was incredible. A picture-perfect start for the US that nobody could have predicted.

After screaming like a mad man and hugging my coworkers, I went to check Twitter to see the collective freakout that normally takes place when historic moments in sports just occur. 90% of the tweets I was looking at were some combination of "OMGGGGGGGGGGGGG", "Holy. Shit." and "FKLDAJEFOIWFIJIAJCD9A38RJMIASDF8" (presumably a pocket-tweet mid-hug). Euphoric is the only word to describe what everyone around me was feeling and clearly the sentiment was shared by millions on social media as well.

And the other 10%? Well, have you ever had one of those friends that goes out of their way to be disinterested in something that you care about deeply? The type of people that will sit there and passive-aggressively mutter snide remarks? That, unfortunately, was the remainder of my Twitter feed.

I get it - soccer isn't for everyone. Some think it is slow and boring. Others hate all the flopping. Most just don't understand it.

But the World Cup is every four years and it is pretty easy to avoid it if you aren't interested in it. So is it really necessary to sit on Twitter and be the biggest contrarian possible by subtweeting or blatantly tweeting about not caring that Clint Dempsey just made history? Because if millions of people from a melting pot of backgrounds can be brought together by one month of soccer every four years, the event has to be somewhat important. So it seems like you could probably just keep your opinions to yourself.

And, sure, rooting for the US once every four years in the World Cup is super trendy and most will stop caring the moment the US is out. But isn't that the exact same as the Summer Olympics? Or the Winter Olympics? So if you can enjoy the Olympics, you should at least be able to understand how others can do the same for the World Cup. That's a good enough reason to just keep your fingers off that send button.

Stop Screwing Up Social Media - It's Just Not That Hard

"I know what will really inspire our brand ambassadors," said generic social media "expert" at large corporation. "We need to give them something that they can tag themselves with and declare their loyalty to our company in an effort to convert others to our services. What we need to do is give them a hashtag on Twitter!"

"Dead on!" replied slightly more junior social media "expert." "This way the people can simply send out a Tweet and all of those around them will see how dedicated they are to us and our community will grow!"

You know I would have thought that this conversation stopped taking place several years ago given how obvious it is that:

• It is a lazy comms strategy
• Personal testimony over Twitter is simply a one-time act - not likely to occur again outside the one time the hashtag is created
• Any brand that could have alienated its users at some point has now given control to those users by opening up the world of social media to the conversation

McDonalds screwed this one up pretty badly when it invited everyone to share their #McDStories (gee, wonder what could have possibly gone wrong with that one?). J.P. Morgan also blew it with their chat to #AskJPM a question, leading to a hilarious series of tweets asking how one goes about blowing up the global economy as effectively as J.P. Morgan helped do. Roger Goodell is no stranger to controversy with how the NFL has handled the lawsuits that former NFL players are bringing in droves that accuse the league of knowingly withholding information on the dangers of playing football, all while trying to add an additional regular season and playoff game to the mix for some more cash for the league. So maybe it wasn't the best idea to give fans (and players) an open forum to #AskCommish anything they thought was important.

#AskEmmert with the NCAA's embattled commissioner Mark Emmert was hijacked. So was #RedskinsPride - the Washington Redskins effort to combat Harry Reid's crusade to force the team to change its name. 

Even what should have been a safe #ILoveWalgreens hashtag was taken over by an unruly social media mob. If your neighborhood drug store isn't a sure bet, don't you think that that might be a sign?

These are all very high-profile businesses here that are really screwing up a comms tactic that isn't that hard. And the reason it isn't that hard is because you just don't do it. I can't think of any time, any brand, in any part of the world that wouldn't run the risk of getting taken over like those mentioned earlier.

I'm not saying don't engage with fans on social media. But the hashtag pride strategy needs to stop. Control the forum and you can help control the message. Send it into the wild and your Twitter hashtag will mutate into an uncontrollable beast.

The White House Social Media Policy: Is Ray-Ban Really Different From Samsung?

A few weeks back, the Boston Red Sox visited the White House to meet with the President because the team won the 2013 World Series. David Ortiz snapped a selfie with Obama and posted it to his Twitter feed, garnering thousands of favorites and retweets. A few days later, it came out that the selfie loosely came as a result of a newly signed sponsorship deal Ortiz had just started with Samsung. Lots of people threw hissy fits about marketing, advertising, authenticity, etc.

White House Press Secretary Jay Carney was quoted saying "As a rule, the White House objects to attempts to use the president's likeness for commercial purposes. And we certainly object in this case."

Two weeks later, a funny thing happened involving the White House once again (albeit, not with President Obama this time). Vice President Joe Biden joined the Instagram community today and his first photo looks awfully promotional, doesn't it:

For all of the ire that the Ortiz-Obama selfie drew, the reaction around the Biden Instagram photo is quite different. Time called the photo "utter perfection." Business Insider said that it was "incredibly on brand." Buzzfeed said his "'gram game is perfect Biden.

Sure, there are some differences between the two photos. Biden posted it himself. Obama did not. Biden was aware of the purpose behind the image. Obama was not.

But if you are going off of Carney's statement above as a general rule of thumb - and it is not an unreasonable assumption that the White House doesn't want the VP used for commercial purposes - explain to me how this is not commercial. Yeah, Biden wears Ray-Bans all the time and it is a trademark of his. But isn't a trademark of Obama being a fun guy who would participate in a selfie with a jubilant David Ortiz anyway? The tweet didn't even mention anything about Samsung, nor would your first thought be "oh, that's a Samsung Galaxy 5 in Ortiz's hand!!" That couldn't have been any less in-your-face branding.

Meanwhile, the Biden/Ray-Ban photo looks like it was taken straight from a final cut of advertisements for the company. It couldn't be any more promotional if it tried.

I understand that the White House would like to control the likeness of the President and Vice President to avoid any unknowing promotional purposes. But this does seem a little off, doesn't it? The White House shouldn't get to pick and choose when it is promotional, whether intentionally or not.

PGA is to NFL as Apple is to Orange

Following Bubba Watston's second Master's victory in three years, I fired up Twitter to see what people had to say about the conclusion. One particular tweet from Bomani Jones caught my eye and it was actually about Jordan Spieth, who finished three strokes behind Watson and tied with Jonas Blixt for second. Spieth is a 20 year-old on the PGA Tour who was nipping at Watson's heels all day. He was one missed birdie put on 16 to cut Watson's lead to two with two holes to play and put a little pressure on him.

Needless to say, it was an amazing performance from the young man and we should expect to see him competing at a high level for many years.

But the tweet stood out to me because of how the individual commented on Spieth's play to address an issue in another sport:

"anyone think golf needs a rule requiring players to stay in school for three years? or that only apply to sports that you like to watch?"

My first thought here was that Jones was talking about the NBA where the age limitation has always been a hot-button issue for the league. But that only requires individuals to be one year outside of high school in order to enter the draft. The only sport that requires three years is the NFL.

I'm not totally sure what Jones is going for with his tweet, to be honest. But it sounds like he is suggesting that the rule for making college football players be three years removed from high school is detrimental to the league/players. I hope that isn't the case, because that just wouldn't make sense.

Say what you will about the NBA's age limit, but the NFL's is a necessity from a very basic level - it makes athletes take a few years to continue growing, becoming bigger, faster, and stronger to take on guys who may be more than 10 years their senior. The NFL has an age limit because if it didn't, then college students going any earlier would get seriously hurt. And I just don't think that there is any question about that.

To suggest that there could be a discussion around abolishing the age requirement for the NFL is absurd at best. There is no chance of an 18 year-old golfer getting hurt playing with men twice his age. It is almost a guarantee that an 18 year-old football player would get hurt by a man twice his size due to the extra years he has had to develop.

The argument isn't just apples to oranges. Its just straight bananas.

David Ortiz and Samsung Challenge Authenticity with White House Selfie

The Boston Red Sox visited the White House on Tuesday as the reigning World Series Champions. The tradition of inviting the winning team of a professional sports league or national championship for college is a little cliche at this point, but I think I am just saying that because none of my teams have ever had the opportunity to visit the POTUS. Regardless, it makes for an easy day for the media to post a couple of pictures and generic athlete quotes about how happy they are to be there, slap it together and there is your story (or lack there of).

David Ortiz decided to spice things up a bit at the White House visit by grabbing a hilarious selfie with Obama and tweeting it out. It has picked up almost 40,000 retweets and more than 45,000 favorites. Everyone had a good laugh about it, it added a little more color to the "story" of the Red Sox visit and then we continue to live our lives normally.

Today it came out that Samsung was up to its old Oscars tricks again and that this was a planned selfie by Ortiz  that Obama did not actually know about beforehand. Okay, whatever. It is still a funny tweet and a good reminder that both professional athletes and the President are human beings with senses of humor. There wasn't any promotional branding in the tweet that suggested Samsung was behind this and it wasn't screaming at me to go buy a Galaxy or Note.

Well, I guess that not everyone felt the same way about it...

"Hang on. Did Samsung really use the word ‘genuine’ in its response? The moment was about as bona fide as the Grade A meat in Hot Pockets. I mean, if there is indeed any purpose of the "selfie," it’s about capturing something impromptu." - Eric Wilbur, Boston.com

"Spontaneity is dead. Samsung killed it." - Chris Cillizza, Washington Post

"Duping the president of the United States into participating with your social media campaign has to be anew low for advertising. It’s flat-out shady. And Ortiz should be embarrassed." - Joshua Green, Bloomberg

Holy shit, these are serious quotes about this? I can't actually believe that people would get this upset about it. Here's a question for them - does you think that because Ortiz did this because Samsung asked him to that it made his smile, his excitement and everything associated with the picture any less sincere? If you honestly think that, then your cynicism has reached an unhealthy height.

As I said above, Samsung wasn't in-your-face about the tweet. They didn't ask Ortiz to use any promotional branding and Ortiz didn't try to force it in there either. Sure, it is an old trick and not a terribly creative one (although, it does raise the sentiment of 'if it ain't broke, don't fix it'). But I don't feel duped by Samsung because of it. When I look at that picture, I see a professional athlete who is an idol to thousands of people with a smile that is ear to ear as he is with someone who is actually more recognizable than he is in public.

So I would highly recommend to anyone who is upset by this to just stop and reevaluate what is worth getting irritated about these days. Because a hilarious picture that came about of a corporate sponsorship should not be high on the list of righteous indignation triggers.

Sidenote: When has a selfie EVER been impromptu? I would argue that a selfie is honestly as far from an impromptu action as they come. For the love of god, and I hate to even have to point to the song "Selfie" but if that doesn't show that they are as calculated as they come, then I don't know what does. Please, don't age yourself like that Boston.com.

Care.com & The NYSE: Humanize The Brand

In January of this year, Care.com listed its initial public offering on the New York Stock Exchange. Care.com is a basically an e-commerce website for baby-sitters. Rather than dealing with word-of-mouth referrals or asking your niece or nephew who may not know how to boil a pot of water, Care.com gives parents a chance to scope out their baby-sitter ahead of time. The industry of full-time nannies and dedicated baby-sitters is booming and Care.com jumped on it early, making the lives of parents easier and more assured.

While watching major cable news networks over the last couple of weeks, I have noticed the commercial where Care.com's CEO, Sheila Marcelo, is ringing the opening bell of the NYSE on the day of the company's IPO. The advertisement can be seen here. Essentially, Marcelo is talking about how happy she is that Care.com has been such a success, how she is living the American dream, etc. It is definitely a great story, especially given that probably not very many people would have thought that she could have taken this company public when she first came up with the idea.

The story is all well and good, but the interesting thing to me in this advertisement is that it is actually a NYSE advertisement. The closing image is of the NYSE logo, but the whole focus is on Care.com.

So why is this significant?

Listen carefully to the messaging that Marcelo uses when she is talking. Love, caring, live, reliable, perfect. Those are all words that Marcelo and Care.com wants associated with their brand for obvious reasons. But the NYSE wants to draw off of that positivity of the Care.com mantra, whether that is explicitly stated or not. The association factor is key here for the NYSE as - let's be honest here - nobody will use any of the above adjectives to describe its brand.

The finance industry is still suffering an image issue following the financial crisis of the past few years. By highlighting the success of a company like Care.com, with a founder who even describes herself as "living the American dream", the NYSE humanizes its brand. It helps dispel the myth that anyone involved in the process is a white male in a stiff suit who only cares about tax breaks and bigger dividends.

Care.com and the NYSE is a natural pairing from a branding perspective in this regard. Both have something to gain - Care.com gets great national exposure, particularly to a more affluent audience that will help generate greater revenue and the NYSE gets to highlight a lovable brand with a founder who is the antithesis of the public's perception of the exchange.

It may be subtle, but I think that both come out ahead in this instance. It isn't going to dispel the belief that the stock exchange is the epitome of greed, but it is one smart step in that direction.

Greg Oden & Anthony Bennett - How We Lose Perspective

Greg Oden started in his first NBA game since 2009 when he broke his kneecap playing for the Portland Trail Blazers. He had already suffered micro-knee fracture surgery and would undergo the same surgery two more times in the next three years. Needless to say, it was a less than ideal start for Oden who was drawing comparisons to Hakeem and Patrick Ewing upon entering the league.

Anthony Bennett, who the Cleveland Cavaliers drafted number one overall in 2013, hasn't exactly lived up to the expectations that come with being the top draft pick. Bennett was definitely a surprise and didn't have the hype around him that Oden did when he entered the league, but that doesn't make the scrutiny around him disappear.

Is Greg Oden a disappointment? What about Anthony Bennett? Did the Blazers and the Cavs completely screw up those draft picks? How can one player get injured all the time? How come the other just isn't as talented as we all thought he was?

Both players are complete busts.

I've seen those words written about both players (more notably for Oden given the aforementioned expectations) with shocking frequency. It doesn't come as a shock that these conversations take place given our affinity for professional sports and the enormous media landscape behind it. When you look at it from the perspective of a sports fan, it is a completely fair discussion.

But what about when we take a step back and think of these young men (don't forget just how young they really are) as just employees for a business? This is their job and they do absolutely everything that they can to get back on track. I don't think that either Oden or Bennett give anything less than 100% when it comes to their profession.

When I think of it as a job, not just two guys who are playing a sport, it saddens me quite a bit to see how much pleasure some people get out of their struggles. Imagine if the next time you were at the office and you messed up on a project, you saw people exchanging emails about what a screw-up you were. People snickering when they find out that you've hit another bump.

I recognize that this is comparing apples and oranges a little bit. And I am not saying that their performance can't be examined closely. But there is no denying that at the end of the day, we expect to be treated with respect from our coworkers and peers with respect to our jobs, just like we should treat them with the same respect. And part of that is not hoping for their failure because it amuses us.

Greg Oden finished with five points and five rebounds today. Anthony Bennett finished with four points and four rebounds. But I'm pulling hard for both of them. They're doing their jobs and deserve more respect than they get. Because we expect the same for us.

My NBA Mount Rushmore

One of the big conversations around the NBA All-Star game this year was who would be the four players on your Mount Rushmore of basketball. I certainly didn't want to be left out of the conversation, so here are my thoughts for the four faces that make their way onto the iconic rock:

• Michael Jordan
• Could this one be any more obvious? The man IS the NBA in so many ways. 50 years from now, we will still be talking about the shrug, the flu game, the shot and the push-off (depends on who you ask). With any luck, we'll have burned any records that remind us that he is one of the worst executives in NBA history.
• Larry Bird
• 3x NBA champ, 3x MVP, 9x 1st team All NBA and a whole bunch of other accolades that aren't worth listing out because it would take way too much time. Tough as nails, but with a shooting touch as soft as fresh sheets in the summertime. Plus, you're telling me his face wouldn't look great chiseled out in rock?
• Oscar Robertson
• The man revolutionized the point guard position. He is the only player in NBA history to average a triple-double for an entire season. I don't care if the pace of play was insanely high that year; averaging a triple double over the course of 82 games is something we might not ever see again.
• Tim Duncan
• Yeah, okay, so maybe I am biased because he is the best player that I can remember watching the entire duration of his career. But his statistics, consistency and team's relevancy for his time in the league is nearly unmatched. Timmy D may not be the sexiest player in NBA history, but he is damn sure one of the best. As a sidenote, there would be some construction issues trying to make his eyes pop out like they do when he is upset about a call.

The next two athletes whose faces should be getting molded right now because they will probably make their way on there - LeBron and Durant.

Who would be in your Mount Rushmore of NBA players?

Is LeBron James against supporting the troops? No. Just stop.

Following Saturday's seriously climactic finish of USA vs. Russia in hockey, where TJ Oshie rightfully became a household name after willing the US to victory in a shootout, fans were treated to a great post-game interview. Hockey players make for some of the best interviews in my opinion because most of them have clearly not had media training and seem to genuinely love what they do.

TJ Oshie is no different. He said all of the right things in several interviews - the thanks should go to US goalie Jonathan Quick, this was really a solid team effort, forecheck, forecheck and forecheck some more - and, of course, in what has become a strange motif of all sporting interviews, Oshie brushes off the title of hero and says that "the American heroes are wearing camo."

Nobody doubts that our American soldiers, whether overseas or based here in the US, are truly heroes for which we all owe great thanks. Athletes, in particular, have become rather fond of praising the troops whenever the opportunity arises. Great! The more appreciation and recognition, the better.

Then a curious thing started happening. This meme started to make its way around Facebook:

You know what, I don't even have the time to sit here and pretend to be diplomatic about this. If you liked this meme on Facebook, retweeted it, shared it on Instagram or whatever form of social media you used - you are dumber than a lobotomized pig and I think less of you.

You're totally right - LeBron is definitely against the troops and is completely selfish for saying that he likes being seen as a role model. Anyone who embraces that fact and is cognizant that it affects his actions on and off the court clearly cares about nobody but himself. No, that makes plenty of sense. I mean, how DARE he suggest that he can serve as a level to aspire to for kids and adults of any age. Coupled with the audacity of not showing love for the troops? ASSHOLE.

Seriously, though, can someone please explain this to me? Why are we trying to vilify LeBron here? It's not like he does about 45x (at LEAST) the number of interviews that TJ Oshie does on a yearly basis and has almost certainly given his thanks to the troops at some point.

Oh, wait. Yes, he has - LeBron James does right by troops. Thank you, internet archives, for allowing me to Google that in approximately 10 seconds and post it to show just how truly idiotic people are for making this comparison.

Supporting the troops is a given. Saying it in every single interview is not a requirement. Especially for a guy who is interviewed multiple times a week.

And promoting bull shit memes like this perpetuates the stereotype of the self-absorbed, thinks-he's-the-greatest-of-all-time black athlete and nobody should stand for it.

LeBron James is a hero to millions of people around the world for his works on and off the court. TJ Oshie is a hero to so many patriots in this country who feel that the Olympics stand for something more than just sports. And the troops that support us are certainly heroes as well - a fact that barely needs repeating at this point.

It's great to remind ourselves that there isn't just one type of heroes in this world.

Is BusinessInsider or its readers the problem?

While perusing Twitter today, I came across a link to a Business Insider article. It was a standard BI type of article where the news was kept fairly high-level, digestible and concisely written - just a quick snapshot of the news and why it was important.

I think that there is a certain amount of that that is healthy for readers in today's fast-paced world. Many would argue that we can only take in so many pieces of information in a given day, so it is better to get as many 1000 feet views of numerous topics than it is to develop an in-depth understanding of a few select issues.

But too much of that and we start to lose the significance of issues by glancing over some of the nuances. And that is where I start to get a little frustrated with a publication like Business Insider. In addition to its click-baiting (save that for another day), it would prefer a gatling gun style approach where it guns down issues left and right rather than focusing on some truly solid reporting on bigger issues. Ultimately it is the reader who loses out when this happens.

Take for instance an article that came out just before the Olympics - 16 Crazy Anecdotes About Sex In The Olympic Village. Never mind the fact that the title of the article would seem to suggest that these are direct anecdotes the journalist acquired, the entire article is simply a "listicle" of a truly excellent piece of journalism that Sam Alipour put together for  ESPN two years ago just before the 2012 London Olympics - Will you still medal in the morning?

The ESPN article is long by our "this article seems interest...holy shit there's a squirrel!!" attention spans. But I have read this ESPN article before and I can tell you that it is well worth the additional 15 minutes that it takes to go start to finish on it. It provides everyone with an authentic description of what it is like in the Olympic Village for an athlete - something which none of us will ever have a chance to experience.

The Business Insider version is a list of one line snippets that were pulled from the article and paired with random images. It took me about 30 seconds to go through the entire thing, told me literally nothing about the actual Olympic village itself and shed no insight on the great lengths that Alipur went through to acquire his information in the article.

So is Business Insider the problem? Or are the readers to blame? It is a little bit of both. On one hand, readers can demand some modicum of effective journalism rather than the laziness of turning an outstanding piece into a tiresome list. On the other hand, Business Insider should be pushing its journalists to produce content that is better than that.

Don't get me wrong, I am not condemning every story that appears on the website. I have seen some longform journalism on Business Insider that I truly enjoyed. I have also seen some great reporting on issues around business and technology. But articles like the one above cheapen the rest of those articles to the point that I frequently avoid reading Business Insider articles that people post on Twitter and Facebook.

Alipour leveraged an insane rolodex on contacts to provide this look into the Olympic Village. Business Insider took his work, gave him a one sentence credit at the top, turned it into a list, slapped a click-baiting title to it and called it complete. And that's where the issue comes in for me.

The next time you're reading an article like this on Business Insider or another similar website and they link back to the original piece - do yourself a favor and read the original. You'll be surprised by just how much you can learn and you just might put the pressure on Business Insider to do more reporting just like it.

For an example of Business Insider doing excellent reporting to show that they truly are capable of it, check out this article on the story behind AOL CEO Tim Cook firing an employee in front of the entire company - The Story Behind Why AOL CEO Tim Armstrong Fired An Employee In Front Of 1,000 Coworkers

TTBG #6 - Matching Your Leathers

One of the keys to acting more like a gentleman is to dress more like one as well. I am not suggesting that a person needs to look like they're on the cover of GQ each day, but paying close attention to the small things can take you from unkempt to dapper in a few minutes.

As we are at the tail end of the holiday season, which is ripe for opportunities to dress up for parties, family gatherings or church, I noticed one thing in particular that men frequently struggle with when it comes to dressing up. It is a violation that is rather minute, but one that can be quite glaring when seen in public. The most common mistake that I saw this holiday season and see on a daily basis for a man is failing to match the color of his belt with his shoes.

Now, I am sure that you are thinking that I am a crazy person who places too much stock in the appearance of a person. And you wouldn't be completely incorrect. But I can assure you that this is one simple fashion change that is easily fixed and won't require you to go out and change up an entire wardrobe.

It is pretty simple - if you are wearing brown shoes, wear a brown belt and not a black one. If you are wearing black shoes, wear a black belt. As those are the standard dress shoe choices for men, you're pretty safe just sticking with that simple rule. If you are venturing into blues, grays or greens, then do your best to simply complement the shoes and belt. They don't need to be a direct match.

Nothing is worse than seeing a man in a nice suit and rocking offsetting shoe and belt colors. Continuity in an outfit is critical so avoid this whenever possible. Remember: being a gentleman is not just in your actions, but how you present yourself to the public as well. So next time you walk out of the house, always remember to check your leathers.

TTBG #5: Thankful All Through The Year
TTBG #4: Hats Are For Outside, Not The Restaurant
TTBG #3 - Eat to the Pace of Your Company