I’m going to come right out and say it: I have always thought Foursquare as kind of creepy, and with the introduction of Facebook Places in the States last week, I’m a tad worried LBS (or, Location-based Shouting, as I’m going to start to call it) is going to get out of hand.  It’s not that I don’t care if you’re at Kew Gardens or Polpo or All Star Lanes, it’s just that I’m sure everyone in the world doesn’t have to be privy to that information as well. I consider myself to be trustworthy – others… I’m not so sure.

You may remember the Please Rob Me campaign started earlier this year by Netherlands-based creatives Frank Groeneveld, Barry Borsboom and Boy van Amstel. It brought to the attention the fact that if you are checking in and announcing publically all the places in the world you are, it leaves wide open, the one place you aren’t…home, which could potentially leave you vulnerable to burglaries. The campaign gained moderate success, but I think it didn’t touch enough on one point – even telling people where you are currently can be dangerous.

I would hope those with stalkers and evil exes wouldn’t use the location-based services, but you never know.  If you’re posting your current whereabouts, is that not an invitation itself to be mugged?

While brands are using LBS to an advantage, I worry about consumers’ eagerness to share, and for what purpose?  Someone tweeting that they’re working late from the Starbucks on Tottenham Court Road may get a free coffee every once in a while, but they could also be leaving themselves open to having their laptop, Blackberry and iPad pinched on the way out.

Or perhaps, I’m over reacting?  What are your thoughts on ‘checking in’?

Last year James Murdoch launched a really quite amazing attack on the BBC, claiming that “the scope of its activities and ambitions is chilling”. It’s worth reading that back and reminding yourself that this is from the man set to inherit the reigns to one of the world’s most powerful media conglomerates. And now that BSkyB has purchased Virgin Media, we can surely expect to see plenty more anti-BBC rhetoric coming from both camps. BSkyB itself is no stranger itself to concerns over market dominance, so just how much credibility should we, as consumers and license fee payers, attach to these concerns?

As far as BSkyB and Virgin Media are concerned, the BBC is harming competition across several of its platforms. The BBC was arguably the first to realise the huge potential in video-on-demand services, for example, and stole a march on its rivals with the launch of the iPlayer back in 2007. James Murdoch was again quick to voice his concerns, claiming that the iPlayer was launched as a “pre-emptive intervention” aimed at “squashing competitors” in the broadband TV market. Just a few months ago, the BBC came under fresh criticism (again, from James Murdoch) for looking to strike a deal with ITV and Channel 4, amongst others, to share content on the iPlayer platform.

Presumably Mark Thompson hasn’t been holding a gun to anybody’s head during these negotiations, which would theoretically result in more people accessing ITV’s and Channel 4’s content. It’s easy to understand why BSkyB would be concerned over the potential success of such a deal, but isn’t that just the nature of business?

The fact that the BBC is answerable to the BBC Trust gives its competitors the opportunity to play this same debate out in the newspapers which, with their vested interest, are happy to peddle the issue. If it is the job of regulatory bodies such as Ofcom and the BBC Trust to protect the interests of consumers and citizens and to promote competition, surely they should be encouraging the fact that the license fee contributes towards such innovation. And if that makes the wider industry up its game, all the better.

Through its various departments online, the Coalition Government had issued a call to action to the general public, to give its policy suggestions on areas such as the NHS, pensions and capital gains tax.

Following 9,500 responses, the Government decided to act on none of them, and issued their policy unchanged. On paper it doesn’t look good and, if we’re honest, a bit pointless.

Simon Burall, director of Involve, a group advising bodies on consultation, told The Guardian: “You have to give the government some credit for trying to do this, but badly designed consultations like this are worse than no consultations at all.

“They diminish trust and reduce the prospect that people will engage again.”

In many respects, he’s got a point. It’s both exciting and commendable that the Government is even considering crowdsourcing as a form of policy formation and surely takes the forays into social media for politics in the UK a step further. In addition to the participation and conversation online around politics, this is a clear sign that the Government is considering the Internet as a legitimate avenue for ideas.

However, as Simon says, it also seems hollow that the Government has failed to act on even just one of the 9,500 suggestions. I know we’re not well versed in the bureaucratic notions of policy making in Westminster, but surely one of 9,500, clearly politically-interested people (hell, if they’re participating in policy crowdsourcing, they must be) suggested a goodun’?!

I don’t believe though, like Simon says, that this episode will diminish trust in the Government, nor that it will reduce the prospect that people will engage again. Not significantly, anyway. Let’s face it – as it stands, the Government and indeed politics in general isn’t held in the highest esteem and considering we have a say effectively one every five years and see little change off the back of it, we’ve become quite accustomed to not being heard.

So let’s see the positives in this. The Government has not just acknowledged the presence of, but indulged in (albeit half-heartedly) crowdsourcing. Who’da thunk it? And not just indulged in it, but indulged in it as a prospective avenue for policy creation.

That, my friends, is progress. Not quite change, but progress nonetheless.

I’m a little behind on my TV viewing but last week I had the pleasure of settling down on the sofa to catch up on the new series of Dragon’s Den, which returned to our screens a fortnight ago. It’s a wonderful concept – you get to snigger and marvel at some of the more ludicrous ideas a la X Factor, but because it’s about ‘business’ you feel totally vindicated about watching.

True to its form the first episode included some howlers, such as a strange lighting system for street signs, which received the dubious accolade of being named the worst idea ever to be presented on the show. It also saw some exciting ventures that received investment from the Dragons including a Devon-based vineyard owner that was looking to fund his fractional concept – selling plots of the vineyard to consumers for a number of years, resulting in their own-brand sparkling wine  - I rather fancy a bottle of Dom Osmondignon, if I say so myself. http://www.pebblebed.co.uk/

However, the over arching success story of the first episode was Kirsty Henshaw, a young entrepreneur looking for investment for her frozen dessert business, which was borne out of her son’s food intolerances: http://www.worthenshaws.co.uk/. She clearly knew her stuff and had managed to get intent from the UK’s largest supermarket for a trial. The Dragons were clearly very, very impressed and it became obvious that a bidding war would ensue. She eventually ended up accepting a deal from ice cream aficionado Duncan Bannatyne and Reggae Reggae sauce success story Peter Jones. An excellent result for her business. Or is it?

My ears pricked up during her pitch when she asked for £65,000 for “branding and PR”. This sounds like a lot of capital for a fledgling business, but when you start breaking it down, you realise that it will soon diminish. Branding doesn’t come cheap so taking a reserved estimate you can expect that she would part with around £35,000, leaving £30,000 for PR, not to mention that she also needed to find the money to increase stock, so actually the PR budget would probably be even less. Given that the product is new and very different to the norm she would firstly need a trade PR campaign to introduce the dessert to the market and encourage buyers to list her. Once achieved it is likely she would want also to invest in consumer PR – spreading the word amongst the people that she wants to give her pudding freezer space. This is a huge task and one that certainly wouldn’t fit within the very modest budget that had been earmarked. This reminded me of a jewellery designer a few series ago that thought she could invest £500 a month in PR, but you have to ask yourself, what’s the point? You may as well save your money as £500 is not going to create a strategic campaign that delivers on the bottom line.

My point is that it seems many people have an unrealistic view of the price of PR – evidently some of the Dragons included. Only Mr P told her that £65,000 wasn’t enough and tried to offer her a further £35,000. I’m sure that behind the scenes, once the cameras have been switched off, the money that changes hands is actually very different to what we, as viewers, see. But even so it’s a depressing time for the PR industry when business stalwarts are undervaluing our market.

Three favourite things at Cannes this year

1. Seminars
As always in Cannes there is a packed schedule of seminars at the Palais’ Debussy theatre, with the great and the good of the advertising sharing their views on the past, present and future of the industry. In typical Cannes fashion the seminars aren’t just a case of taking to the stage. My favourite was Digitas’ unique format – bringing Cage Fighting to Cannes. Delegates were treated to five three minute “rounds” of debate from experts including actor Common, Monty Miranda and Gavin Palone. The battle summed up the way that the lines between brand integration and brand interruption are blurred. Just as TV spots are evolving into more integrated brand content the A-list Hollywood “star” is also having to get in on the act. Nick Cannon or Mr Mariah Carey, who judged the fight commented that today he is more than an actor and TV presenter, but also producer, network head and brand in his own right. Common reinforced this view when talking about how he now has to align his own brand with that of the brands he “acts” with via product placement and also represents through traditional advertising channels. Collaboration and creativity are a must for this relationship to work.

2. Parties
SapientNitro’s Opening Night Gala on Tuesday at the Carlton Beach saw thousands of delegates enjoy an evening under the clear Cannes sky fuelled by “banging tunes”, a sumptuous buffet and the odd glass of vin. But party head aside what was most interesting was the buoyant mood of the festival in contrast to a more muted feel in recent years. The industry is all set to capitalise on global economic recovery and ready to embrace a new order – namely integrating production, new media and all things digital with the traditional armoury.

3. Networking
Of course a trip to Cannes is incomplete without a few late nights at the Gutter Bar (which I finally discovered was named by a group of Australians way back when, who wanted a cheap(er) watering hole. Gutter comes from the fact that you end up standing in the road). As always by 3 am the joint was heaving. Any earlier and you’re likely to catch a local having a quiet slurp of brandy on their way home for supper. Being in the know of the bar’s location is enough to let you join the ranks of CEOs, ECDs and other industry high-rollers. With rich network pickings like these who needs Monaco? If you’ve happened to sleep the day away (which I hasten to add, I hadn’t) the bar enables you to catch up on all the gossip and key learnings of the day at the Palais. Social media is clearly the issue de jour (see I learnt some French too), yet sometimes you can’t beat the real thing.

Finally, I would love to be able to report on the shenanigans in the tent at the top of the Palais, but entry was restricted solely to Creative Directors. Sometimes there are limits to the skilful PR blag, despite going to such lengths of photoshopping my business card!

Yesterday’s conclusion of the longest match in the history of tennis saw many of the E! team clustering around the television feeling sorry for Nicolas Mahut and marvelling at how tall John Isner is.

In what was a seriously impressive display of stamina and determination, John and Nicolas took the match to an incredible 70-68 score in the final set, after 11 hours and 5 minutes of play. But what next?  Well, being dedicated media / advertising geeks here at Eulogy!, we immediately began to discuss the inevitable ad deals which will be coming the way of these players in the coming weeks and months.  Viagra, Duracell, Pringles and Long Johns (!) were all suggested, and I’m sure we’ll see similar brands throwing their hats in the ring to snap these guys up.

On a serious note, this issue raises what we are constantly saying on behalf of our marketing clients: sponsorship and celebrity endorsement should always centre around a valid and relevant link from endorser to brand; there’s nothing worse than a sponsorship deal that leaves consumers confused as to what the connection is.

We’ll be keeping our eyes peeled to see what happens next for these players; hopefully they’ll fit in a nice long rest before embarking on anything new!

Both Stephen and Fernando demonstrated the beauty of the results that these techniques provide. PR agencies can produce definitive statistics with SEO and PPC campaigns – unequivocal results. Fantastic!

Stephen and Fernando also discussed the complexity of ownership with the group. Eulogy!’s well versed in SEO having completed a number of projects for clients, but Stephen confirmed our fears that the PR industry (and the marketing community at large) is yet to understand the practice.

Five years ago, SEO firmly belonged in the hands of search agencies. Then ad and digital agencies took a bite. And now PR agencies, too? Well, yes of course! It’s editorial. Who else is better placed to write authoritative copy, rich with brand messaging and keywords? SEO sits firmly within the online PR gambit. It amplifies what other marketing channels churn out. It seeds your content all over the shop to encourage people to click, to engage and to talk!

I am committed to working with bodies like the PRCA to carve out a fair share of ownership of online and social media budgets. We’ve seen a big move towards this in the industry. Sure it’s a struggle sometimes, like when clients refuse to acknowledge PR as anything but proof in a paper, but our digital revolution is increasingly inevitable.

We’re working hard to this speed along. As chief exec, it’s my job to drive the agency forward not only in terms of new business but also skills and professional development.We believe PR’s love affair with social media will be a hot and steamy one, and it’s only just begun.

Nike has just launched its 2010 World Cup ad, featuring the likes of Wayne Rooney, Cristiano Ronaldo, Didier Drogba, Kobe Bryant and Homer Simpson (yes, really). It’s slick, it’s blackly funny and representative of the excellent football ads we’ve come to expect from the likes of Nike. However, it’s the little intricacies that truly point to this being a great ad. Wayne Rooney in a trailer park and an egotistical statue of Ronaldo are strokes of genius – someone over at ad agency Wieden & Kennedy has truly got their head screwed on.

Apologies for the bleeding into the sidebar – widescreen YouTube is the bane of this blogger’s existance!

If we were to really nitpick, the only flaw with it is Ronaldinho’s appearance, despite him not being included in Brazil’s World Cup squad, points more to the pitfalls relying on ageing sports stars for an ad campaign than a failing of the ad itself.

But honestly, who cares? It’s an amazing ad – no doubt it’ll probably be the best thing we see all summer after England crash out in the group stages.

Intel and Vice Magazine have partnered to create a new hub for innovators and artists called The Creators Project.

Focusing on artists, musicians, film makers and writers in the digital age, the project is aimed at championing all manner of creative talents, and has the backing of famous names such as Mark Ronson and Spike Jonze.

Intel’s philosophy is clearly that if it promotes the good things that can be done with digital technology, then more people will be encouraged to buy their stuff, while the more creativity Vice sources, the better it is for the magazine.

In the meantime, we get some interesting content, videos and interviews to take a look at: everyone wins. Along with the site itself, Vice and Intel are also holding loads of events across the world. Make a note in your diaries for July 17th, when The Creators Project hits London – no doubt some pretty exciting stuff will be going down.

Great news from Eulogy! Towers today. The PR Week ‘Best Places to Work‘ list has just been released, and Eulogy! scored a Silver.  Out of 120 entries, there were only two gold awards, four silver and four bronze.  Naturally, we’re beyond chuffed.

You can read our entry on why Eulogy is one of the best PR agencies to work for, but if I’m tooting our horn, I’d say it’s probably all about the Christmas party. They’re pretty much legendary: