Let’s face it, the news isn’t good, no matter where you look. Unemployment figures refuse to budge, oil continues to pump into the Gulf, the stock market is wobbly, the EU is in financial disarray, and politicians spend more time finger-pointing than doing anything about it all.

That’s the macro-level bad news. On the positive side, independent agents are still holding up their end of things. And all I can say is, you guys must be really busy. AA&B and National Underwriter recently called for nominations for our first joint Agency of the Year awards, and although we received plenty of requests for submissions forms, in the end many took a pass on the July 1 deadline.

Although this may be a reflection on our selective criteria, I suspect there’s more to it than that. Based on what I hear from individual agents, things are simply too hectic at their agencies for them to take the time and thought required to respond. A good news/bad news thing: The good news is you’re busy, the bad news is staff cutbacks have probably left you too shorthanded to do much else besides just get along.

AA&B columnist Chris Amrhein recently commented to me about the lack of feedback on my posts at this blog, and I theorized that the crappy economy is keeping all of us too busy for niceities like forum comments. As an insurance educator, Chris is constantly out and about in the field with you guys, and he believes that independent agencies — small businesses serving small businesses — are run by inherently optimistic entrepreneurs who hate cutting back or operating in “survival mode,” but are forced to based on what’s happening in the larger economy. It’s “Chicken Little” syndrome, with agents at the mercy of the tidal wave of bad news begetting more bad news.

Not surprisingly — and tying into Chris’s original observation that my blogs that get the heaviest response deal with social media — the antidote seems to lie in technology. Chris calls Apple the performance exception to the current malaise rule:

In this economy, how can one company consistently continue to charge more, for arguably similar or possibly inferior technology, and still blow results through the roof? Perhaps (Steve) Jobs hasn’t gotten the message what he’s doing just won’t work anymore in this economy. Lord knows there are analysts and pundits daily trying to get him to see the light, but the fool just won’t listen. I wish some on our industry and others would be so foolish.

Very true. But assuming parity between its products and its competitors, what really sets Apple apart? For one thing, Apple is a master at perpetuating its brand, especially to young buyers. Not only that, but Apple gets there first, wherever “there” happens to be. Combining innovative products with ubiquitous branding equals unsurpassed market penetration.

The lesson to be learned for us? Don’t let today’s economic headaches keep you from looking at tomorrow — where the markets are, what are the emerging industries and business needs, and how you can help solve your clients’ newest problems. And of course, don’t underestimate the power of carving out a unique identity for your business and exploiting it to the max — especially through social media, where the new buyers live.

Don’t let “survival mode” get in the way of your future. Even if it hurts a little, take some time right now to think outside the box for ways to move your business out of today’s hard times and into the future.

An article in today’s Wall Street Journal got me thinking about how to put the BP oil spill into perspective.

 The gist of it is that although insured losses from the Deepwater Horizon Gulf Coast oil spill could reach $3.5 billion insured, according to Moody’s, this disaster and the volcanic ash mess earlier this year could end up being a shot in the arm for the insurance industry. In the case of the oil spill,  80 percent of the losses will be carried by self-insured BP, and the volcanic ash thing had little impact on insured losses. The “upside” is, insurers will be able to hike rates on property coverage for oil rigs and offshore energy liability insurance to reflect the increase in risk.

The article concludes:

This would provide some welcome relief for an industry that for years has suffered from declining prices and volumes, because demand for cover declined in the absence of large catastrophes.

Talk about turning lemons into lemonade. You can see this oil spill from space and it’s threatening the whole Gulf Coast, Florida Keys and Cuba, but heck, the insurance industry is happy because we might be able to raise rates.

I don’t know about you, but that doesn’t seem like much of a reason to celebrate.

Last week, III came out with a comprehensive study on the impact of Deepwater Horizon and the possible fallout we can expect to see in the insurance industry. True, the industry may only end up shouldering 20 percent of the direct p-c losses, but a disaster of this magnitude will doubtless spread just as inexorably as the oil itself to all areas — especially as the litigation sharks begin to circle (as of May, 110 lawsuits and counting).

According to III, first- and third-party insurance policies that will take the biggest hits are:

• Business interruption/loss of production income
• Comprehensive general liability
• Environmenta/pollution liability
• Operators’ extra expense (provides coverage when controlling well after a blowout)
• Physical damage
• Workers’ compensation/employers liability

 One of the biggest insurance angles of this story, however, doesn’t lie in potential claims or rate increases, but in risk management — or lack thereof. With the U.S. Attorney General announcing that federal authorities were opening criminal and civil investigations into the spill, it’s likely that a host of risk management oversights will come to light, including increasing pressure on the Minerals Management Service and its lackadaisical regulation of offshore drilling.

In fact, based on the number and magnitude of oil spills over the last 20 or so years, nuclear power plants, in spite of their bad press, are beginning to look like paragons of safety in comparison (there’s an interesting blog on the subject here).

And as far as pinning hard-market hopes on Deepwater fallout, I wouldn’t hold my breath — everyone expected that a hard market would be inevitable after the losses of Hurricane Katrina, but it didn’t happen. Given the fact that there’s still plenty of capacity in the market, it seems unlikely that a single event, even as big as this oil spill, will cause the soft market to magically disappear.

Make my day.

My last blog post on the possibility of a social media backlash got some attention — heck, it even inspired Aartrijk blogger Charles Wasilewski to compare me to Betty White.

But whether we’re branding our businesses using Facebook, Foursquare, LinkFaceTwit or speaking at the Kiwanis Club, an insidious fact lurks under all this hoo-ha — something I wrote about in this blog back in 2008, and made a reappearance in yesterday’s National Underwriter. And that is, as the headline said, “Insurance assets not Americans’ top financial priority.”

From the May 20 news story:

Americans recognize the importance of protecting their assets, but ensuring adequate insurance coverage for homes, cars and other possessions ranks low on Americans’ financial priority list, according to a recent Country Financial survey.

The survey, compiled by Rasmussen Reports, LLC and based on telephone calls to 3,000 Americans, found that just 2.3 percent of Americans listed having the right level of insurance protection on assets as their top financial priority…

With respect to respondents’ biggest financial priorities, having enough money to pay monthly bills far exceeded other concerns, with 53.1 percent stating it is their top priority (Ed: emphasis mine). Saving for a secure retirement (16.6 percent), having adequate health insurance (3.9 percent), saving for a child’s education (2.8 percent), and “some other priority” (5.2 percent) also topped having the right level of insurance protection on assets.

I know I write for a property-casualty publication whose readers primarily insure businesses, and that this article specifically deals with consumers. But the significance of the boldfaced statement above — that more than half of the respondents were more concerned about simply paying their bills than anything else — shouldn’t be lost on anyone who sells any kind of insurance — or anything else, for that matter.

This week the Dow had a hissy fit over the turmoil in the EU and an unemployment report that was worse than the so-called experts expected it to be. To put it colloquially, “Well, duh.”  To put it in macroeconomic terms that even Goldman Sachs can understand, the economy sucks because people are out of work and can’t afford to buy anything. Until that changes, it doesn’t matter what happens on Wall Street, in housing and construction, in retail sales or anywhere else that purports to be an indicator of economic health.

And it’s precisely that elephant in the room that will ultimately render the MySquareFaceTwit discussion as relevant as the old “how many angels can dance on the head of a pin” controversy.

Do consumers have to buy insurance? Yes. Do consumers have to buy more than the bare bones coverage, upgrade or cover more stuff? No. And even if they wanted to, a huge percentage of them who are unemployed – 9.9 percent of the U.S. working-age population, as of April — probably can’t afford to.

Luckily for us, though, most Americans can still afford their computer or smartphone service so they can continue to read the latest updates on FaceMyTwitTube — at least for now. Considering the millions of manufacturing, construction and financial services jobs that the Wall Street Journal says are lost forever,  even Americans’ thirst for constant connectedness might not be the inevitability it seems to be now.

In her long-awaited appearance on “Saturday Night Live,” Betty White called Facebook being a “huge waste of time,” adding that “when I was growing up we had a phonebook, but you wouldn’t waste an afternoon with it.” If our crack lawmakers and big businesses don’t figure out a way to address unemployment, we might all be sitting around marketing with the phonebook — if anyone’s phones are still connected and if there’s anything left to sit on.

It’s been a little over a year since my noble experiment with Twitter began (see my blog, ”I’m all a-Twitter“), going on 2 years since lauching this blog, and several years since I’ve been on Facebook and LinkedIn.

Speaking strictly for myself, I’m still not completely sold on the value of social media, at least for myself. To be completely honest, the more I become involved with these communication methods, the more I feel enslaved by them, and I wonder if other users feel the same way. In fact, I wonder if the whole social media thing isn’t getting close to reaching the saturation point.

I realize that this sort of thinking is tantamount to high treason, especially in an industry that lauds social media as essential to marketing and branding. I also realize I may be contradicting myself, because I’ve written repeatedly about the importance of insurance agents using social media, in this very blog and elsewhere. But I’m speaking personally right now, and isn’t that what social media is supposed to be all about — transparency and authenticity?

Facebook alone is single-handedly doing a lot of harm to the concept of social media. On top of infuriating users by changing its “fan” settings to “like” and generating lawsuits by changing privacy settings, just this week there was another “security flaw” that allowed users to view other people’s private live chats and friends requests. Twitter, with its new ad platform, seems to be going down the same path. Both share a common strategy: insinuating themselves into our daily routine as a “free,” easy-to-use, “fun” service, becoming indispensible — and then monetizing that service. I’m just waiting for the day when Facebook, Twitter or both announce that they’re charging users for their services. Wonder how many “friends” we’ll have left when that happens.

Our industry’s acceptance of social media happened with an almost science-fiction-esque rapidity. Remember how long it took insurance to even start thinking about adopting e-mail and Web pages? Social media reached that level of acceptance in a nanosecond. Twitter has only been on the scene since 2007, but it’s already an indispensible part of the branding tool kit, with even the most staid insurance companies tweeting away, like something out of “Invasion of the Body Snatchers.”

IMHO, as we hepcats on the InterWebs say, I think we are in for a major consumer backlash on social media, whether it’s due to oversaturation, overcommercialization, or being eclipsed by the Next Big Thing. And I don’t think this backlash will necessarily be related to older users, either. You can make the case that I feel this way because I’m an elderly curmudgeon, but statistics show that only 16 percent of the 24-and-younger demographic use Twitter, and that the highly prized Millennial demographic is even starting to be eclipsed on Facebook by older users. Maybe the younger users are already beginning to sense that these sites are becoming oversaturated with commercialism.

I’m not saying that that people will stop using social media, or that we’ll suddenly go back to issuing quotes on paper via snail mail. But people don’t like to be “sold” — especially when the selling comes in the guise of friendship and free expression.

Perhaps today’s forms of social media will be eclipsed by some monster merger of FaceTwitLink, or something new and different that we won’t even see coming. Or maybe people will just get tired of tweeting, texting and talking on cellphones and rediscover the pleasures of face-to-face contact. At least I hope so: A recent study shows that one of 10 of under-25ers would interrupt having sex to take a text message. I sure hope that text message isn’t a tweet from an insurance agent.

Last week I had the pleasure of attending an independent agent seminar presented by Hales & Co. and hosted by National Underwriter and AA&B on “creating and enhancing shareholder value.”

Don’t let the Hales tag fool you: although M&A was a large part of the discussion, it was by no means the only topic. In fact, the all-day event pretty much ran the gamut of all the challenges independent agents face, from complying with the new healthcare reform law and other legislation to building a stronger brand.

The main message I came away with was this: Being an independent insurance agent is not for wimps. Not only are you stuck competing in the worst economic mess since the Great Depression, but you also have to worry about complying with state and federal regulations, finding new business, tracking your insurers’ financial stability, and on top of everything else, staying on top of Facebook, LinkedIn and Twitter.

And now, to add insult to injury, you’re also a target for professional wrestlers.

In a story that sounds like something from the Onion, last week the St. Petersburg Times reported that Hulk Hogan (real name: Terry Bollea) has sued his insurance broker, Wells Fargo Insurance Services, claiming the broker should have offered him an umbrella policy, which would have protected him from lawsuits when his son crashed his car, catastrophically injuring a passenger in 2007. Although he had a third-party auto liability policy with a $250,000 limit, Hulk recently paid a confidential settlement in the accident, which the broker lawsuit seeks to recover.

The case goes to the heart of the broker-as-consultant issue, which holds the profession to a higher standard of ethics and expertise than a mere policy-pusher. According to the Times article:

Didn’t Bollea have a personal responsibility to investigate on his own what he needed to do to protect his multimillion-dollar net worth?

“Not if you put your trust in your broker,” Florin (Hulk’s lawyer) said.

“This isn’t a personal responsibility case,” Florin said. “This is a professional responsibility case.”

 Every agency consultant, including those at the Hales event, extols the virtues of independent agents and brokers differentiating themselves in a tough market by becoming more professional and consultative. Unfortunately, as the Hulk case demonstrates, that professionalism can be a double-edged sword. If you’ve cut corners to survive the soft market and the recession, that frugality could come back to haunt you if you’re not covering all the bases with your agency services.

 As the industry continues to evolve in sophistication, don’t be surprised if you start seeing more of these types of cases.

And it would be really cool if they could be settled with a cage match.

In the ongoing dialogue about the pros and cons of how involved to get in the social media revolution comes a real monkey wrench: Unvarnished.

In case you haven’t already heard, Unvarnished, which is currently in beta testing, is a new social networking site that will allow “people rating” — from the sounds of it, kind of like LinkedIn on crack cocaine.

Actually, from the description, Unvarnished seems to more closely resemble sites like Yelp and TripAdvisor, except what’s being ranked (or ranked on) isn’t a company, it’s you. Yes, Unvarnished allows anonymous reviewers to take potshots, not at your business, but you as a business professional.

From the Getunvarnished.com site:

Unvarnished reviews help you get the inside scoop on other business professionals, providing candid assessments of coworkers, potential hires, business partners, and more.

By contributing Unvarnished reviews, you can share your knowledge of other professionals, giving credit where credit is due, and valuable feedback where needed.

Lastly, your own Unvarnished profile, which you may create yourself or claim one that has been created for you, helps you take control of and build your own professional reputation. Get recognition for your accomplishments and actively manage your career growth.

Doesn’t sound so scary — except that the reviews are “reviewer identities are hidden from reviews,” and your own profile can either be created by you, or someone who is reviewing you. When this is the case, you can “claim your profile,” and “actively build and manage” your professional reputation. Unfortunately, this seems to primarily consist of defending yourself against anonymous slings and arrows tossed by virtually anyone who chooses to do so.

And although there appears to be a set of review guidelines (reviews should be “business based,” “well written” and “honest”), these seem more like suggestions than rules. There doesn’t appear to be any moderation system, something that’s in place on even the weirdest of message boards. And with 400,000 professional profiles already loaded into the Unvarnished system, your name might already be up there.

The hue and cry has already gone up over the implications of Unvarnished. Seems to me it would be a legal nightmare (or dream, depending on what side you’re coming from), including claims of defamation, privacy violations and libel, not to mention EPL suits if an Unvarnished review results in hiring, firing or job discrimination issues.  A recent Chicago Tribune article quotes Unvarnished developer Peter Kazanjy as calling his brainchild “big and scary,” and a Harvard pundit describing it as empowering “hate, exclusion and polarization.”

Granted, some of the fluffy recommendations on LinkedIn, most solicited by the recipients, should be taken with a grain of salt. But rating a fellow human being isn’t the same as giving one star to a lousy restaurant or complaining about the dirty sheets at a chain motel. No matter how much Unvarnished may claim it’s only rating “professionalism,” the personal aspect is bound to leak in.

In the cutthroat business of insurance, where policies are constantly being shopped and switched, a couple of unsubstantiated bad reviews for an insurance agent can make or break a business. And unless you just started doing business yesterday, you’re bound to have a couple of complaints somewhere in your professional history.

I’d love to hear what you think about this latest wrinkle in social media. Does Unvarnished scare you?

To paraphrase the late, great Rodney Dangerfield, independent insurance agents don’t get no respect.

It’s bad enough that a recent career survey ranked your profession below janitors, bookbinders and even editors (see my related blog, ”At least you’re not a roustaboust“). Now, the latest Forrester Research consumer survey reveals that your customers don’t even find you fun.

The survey, conducted over the Internet last October, gave independent agents an overall score of “okay” from 4,600 consumers who had interacted with a variety of companies. Forrester asked consumers to rate insurance companies on three areas: “meets needs,” “easy to work with” and “enjoyable.” Several insurers, including USAA, Liberty Mutual, Progressive and The Hartford, were ranked “good” by respondents. But when it came to being “enjoyable,” consumers rated independent agents “poor,” while giving them “good” ratings for “meets needs” and “easy to work with.”

What does this mean? Evidently it’s not an ease-of-use issue; respondents ranked agents “good” on meeting customer needs and being easy to work with. And it’s not just a carrier issue, either. Savvy carriers know, and slower carriers are discovering, that it’s not enough to simply provide ease of use through technology and real-time services — in fact, that’s just the starting point (see this related article on Deep Customer Connections’ recent survey on agents telling carriers they need more ease of use).  

From just looking at the numbers, the problem seems to be with the agency system itself, as several carriers got high marks from consumers as being enjoyable to work with. Granted, the results may be skewed because of the focus on personal lines insurance purchasers, but this dissing of insurance agents shouldn’t be the case. It all boils down to the perception of insurance agent as unnecessary middleman, useful perhaps, but more likely just another roadblock between the customer and the underwriter.

The irony is, agents are in a much better position to deliver real customer satisfaction — and yes, even “fun” – than any insurer ever could. In our monthly agency success stories, we speak with agency owners, especially those in small towns or rural areas, who don’t think twice about emergency customer visits, of knowing the names and ages of teenaged drivers about to be added to a family’s auto policy, of engaging customers in intimate conversations to discover their plans for the future and how insurance coverage can help protect those plans. These agencies and their employees are also connecting to their communities through charitable work, recruitment at area schools, and other ways to create engagement with customers and prospects. It’s a testament to the level of service that every independent agent should be providing to valued customers, especially at a time when every customer counts.

And inevitably in today’s world, part of that customer outreach is through intelligently developed and executed social media planning. Maybe that’s where the smart carriers have an edge on agencies — they have the financial wherewithal and staffing to plunge right in. (Luckily, you don’t need these resources to make good use of this new tool: check out ACT’s recommendations for creating a social media policy for your independent agency). 

With more insurers, including traditional direct writers, using multiple distribution methods, the stakes are higher than ever for agents to prove themselves invaluable to their customers — not just by meeting their insurance needs in a smart and timely way, but by engaging with them on multiple levels.

What’s your agency doing to build your brand perception with your customers?

In our December look at agency Internet marketing, the first question in our reader survey was, “Does your agency/brokerage have a Web site?” The response was 81%. Why not 100%, you might ask.

Another person asking was Duke Williams, a blogger and consultant on agency Internet use. Last month, Duke decided to conduct an informal survey of “feet on the street results for actual agency Web presence.” His methodology was simple: he used the “find an agent” feature on many insurance carrier Web sites, and Googled the term “car insurance city name state name.” He used the SuperPages, YellowPages and about a half dozen other lists online.

In individually searching several locations in South Carolina, North Carolina, Georgia, Alabama and Florida, he found:

• 248 independent agencies
• 49 Nationwide agencies
• 19 online-only agencies
• 51 State Farm agencies
• 26 Allstate agencies
• 7 Farmers agencies
• 7 Alpha agencies
• 2 Farm Bureau agencies
• 1 GEICO local agency
• 1 Direct General agency (rregional non-standard auto insurance carrier with owned agency locations)

While these results seem to indicate a strong presence for independent agencies, a closer look tells another story. Of the 248 independent agencies that came up in the search, only 64 — a paltry 25.8% — had a Web site, and only a fraction turned up in the Google “local results” search.

Delving deeper, Duke discovered that the agencies with Web sites weren’t consistent in functionality, even in non-real-time. For instance, 51.6% had quote request forms, but only 12.5% had “request a policy change” forms, and only 20.3% had “report a claim” forms. Not surprisingly, Duke reported that all the national direct writers had very high functionality.

While you could argue that Duke’s results are atypical — focused on a limited geographic area and a single line of business — you’d be missing the point. In every way, direct writers are making it easy for consumers to find and use their products and services — and it isn’t all about price.

Woody Allen once said that “80% of success is showing up.” When it comes to Web pages, the odds are even better if you show up with a functional product that makes it as easy as possible for people to use what you have to offer.

Last month we posted an interview on our Web page with Progressive’s  Karen Barone, national distribution leader for agency business, which proved to be 0ne of our most popular features.

Not surprisingly, part of the article’s interest — or more accurately, controversy — involves Progressive’s promotion of direct purchase along with sales through its agency force. 

Many of our readers pointed to Progressive’s heavy TV advertising — currently featuring the wacky saleswoman character, “Flo” — as testimony to its commitmemt to direct sales and cutting out the middleman. Surprisingly, in spite of the prevalence of Progressive advertising promoting direct sales,  Barone noted that about 65 percent of Progressive’s sales actually come through its more than 30,000 independent agencies.

Now, in recognition of that fact, Progressive is unveiling on Oct. 19 a new Flo commercial, featuring — you got it — an independent agent. (Well, actually, he’s an actor playing an independent agent, kind of like actress Angelina Jolie will play me in “The Laura Toops Story,” but you get the idea.) And, taking a tip from other industry branding programs (remember the Big I and Raymond Burr?), Progressive agents can even access a version of the commercial they can customize with their agency’s branding to run locally.

The thinking behind this move seems pretty sound — an attempt to promote the insurer’s already prevalent independent agency sales. But the end of the commercial — a voiceover that states, “Prices vary based on how you buy” — sums up the controversy. Because, of course, consumers who buy directly through Progressive will pay less than those who go through an agent.

Do you think Progressive’s new campaign will increase agency sales?

One of my favorite TV shows is AMC’s Mad Men, that paeon to the advertising industry of the early 1960s, when (mostly) men smoked and drank and came up with concepts to brand businesses and sell products. Last season, several episodes revolved around Sterling Cooper’s launch of a television department. At first, they’re not sure what to do with it. The department head is overworked, underpaid and disrespected. When he can’t keep up the pace, agency brass tries to fob off script reviews to the curvaceous office manager. And top dog Don Draper sometimes has a tough sell persuading clients of the importance of adding television to their media mix. Sterling Cooper even makes a point of hiring a couple of young guys to keep up with the new cool medium.

This sounds familiar, if you replace “television department” with “social media.”

Throw away everything you know about customer outreach, time management and building a brand. Over the past year, social media (SM) has changed the landscape of all these areas of property-casualty insurance agency operation, from how you manage your employees to staying in touch with your customers.

And the dust hasn’t settled yet. Even the experts are unsure about how social media will shake out in the business world. One thing is certain, however: Ignoring it is not an option.

That much was evident at the first Aartrijk Brand Camp, held this week at the snazzy Hotel Sax in downtown Chicago. The day-and-a-half meeting, attended by a cross-section of agents, carriers and media types, is the premier event hosted by insurance branding guru Peter van Aartrijk (who I knew long before his guru days). Speakers and subjects ranged from the macro view (Brad Keown of Facebook) to the practical (Marcia Hansen of Allstate), and everything in between.

Some of the findings were startling.

• 29% of consumer consumption is digital, and that number is growing
• Facebook has 90 million U.S. users, and plenty of your customers are there
• When it comes to sheer number of users, “Social media is the new porn,” according to Daniel Honigman, digital communicatio9ns supervisor at Weber Shandwick
• 91% of B-to-B decisionmakers participate in social media, 69% for business purposes
• 70 million retiring baby boomers around the globe are being replaced with only 15 million Gen Xers, with 55 million Gen Yers waiting in the wings, according to Deloitte.

This adds up to nothing less than a quantum shift in how we do business. Statistically, the future face of business will be increasingly female, Hispanic, and very comfortable with all forms of Web 2.o technology. This is the demographic we need to attract and understand, both as employees and customers. Much of our communication with them boils down to authenticity, transparency and trust — words not typically associated with insurance.

Take employees, for example. Because much of social media blur the lines between the personal and professional, your employees can be your company’s goodwill ambassadors everywhere in the virtual world. The Brand Camp speakers agreed that instead of building firewalls between your employees and this online world, you should be training them on its use. The thinking is that they’re going to be popping onto Facebook and YouTube on company time, anyway; you might as well make sure they’re doing it right when it comes to representing your business.  Bottom line: If you hired them, you should be able to trust them to do right by you — radical thinking from what most of us are used to!

Social medial also mean instant and constant accessibility.  Not too long ago, I would have “covered” this event by writing up the proceedings for publication in a magazine, which readers would get more than a month later. Reporters covering the Brand Camp tweeted their comments for instant delivery throughout the event, updated their Facebook or LinkedIn pages, or blogged about it, with plenty of room for others to comment (feeedback is a key element of social media).

This doesn’t mean the “old” communication methods are dead. Press releases are alive and well as a way to stay on a publication’s radar, and in spite of the growth of “unofficial” sites, there is still plenty of cachet in being written about in a recognized publication (whew! Good news for us formerly ink-stained wretches!). But social media needs to be part of your branding arsenal, and like any other branding effort, must be thoughtfully integrated into the mix.

What is your agency doing with social media to promote your business?