I will write something about NGO now. Today, we have one good guest speaker from 38 degree to talk about the inside stories of NGO.

First, I want to make clear of the terms of NGO-Non Government Organization. It is different from charities. NGO can deal with political issues, while charity can’t do. There are generally two kinds of NGO actions: lobbying against government and persuasion towards grassroots for changing behavior. Both of the purposes of these two actions are the same- for change.

The guest speaker talked about some inside story about NGO PR, I just listed the bullion points of him.

  • 1 NGO uses online media a lot, because Internet is cheap, quick and for mass.
  • 2 NGO moves much faster than any other sectors in the society. NGO always foresees the upcoming future for the society and uses new media faster than any other sectors in PR.
  • 3 When NGO goes to a small place for an issue. They will first get to talk to decision makers who set the agendas. The way about how to approach them is carried out by generating controversy buzz through the media and then forcing the authorities to come to the public for an explanation.
  • 4 When there is a crisis issue against one corporate, the corporate under attack will then work with other charities to do other things so as to convert public attention from the original issue.
  • 5 Smoking companies pay money to have smoking pictures in movies. Is this ethical? Before this talk, I have never thought this before. There are a lot of cool films which involve men’s charming way of smoking or women’s attractive way of smoking. It seems that tobacco companies put a lot of money to do that. Young people today see smoking as a fashionable and cool personality. But they don’t know that they are cheated by brands. Now one question come out: it is ethical to promote tobacco? PR practitioners will defend that tobacco is produced for the needs of people not for killing people.
  • 6 PR and science. Has PR degraded the trust of science among the public? Scientific research has always been used as a strategy for PR people in a campaign. Recently, I have read one piece of news in the newspaper. It was a scientific research, telling people that people may have foot disease if they wear boots with a poor quality. This research is sponsored by UGG, so there is a very big picture to show an example of good boots. Yes, there is some scientific truth in the news, but obviously this is also PR news for UGG.

Public are stuffed by loads of scientific research news. Do they still believe science? I think it is wise not to believe everything in the news. Otherwise, we will be the poor target which brands hunt for.