Jul 06

Focusing on the Good Part II: The Invisible Illnesses

And, here’s the second of two guest blogs from Peppercomm’s Taylor Shawver…

Focusing on the Good Part II: The Invisible Illnesses

“Just because you can’t see them doesn’t mean they’re not there” – The Invisible Illnesses

Breaking the stigma around mental health has been a topic of conversation in recent years. There have been more people trying to bring down the biases against mental illnesses.

During my time at the College of Charleston (CofC), I had the opportunity to work with a woman who is now changing the world with individual’s stories and education. A fellow CofC graduate and Student Government Association colleague created The Invisible Illnesses, a nonprofit organization aimed at reducing the mental health stigma one story at a time. Founder, Emily Torchiana, initially created the organization as a project with her photographer Jesse Volk. The project shared weekly stories from College of Charleston students regarding their struggle with mental illnesses.

The impact of these stories quickly grew, and The Invisible Illnesses nonprofit organization was born. The Invisible Illnesses provides a public platform for individuals who suffer from mental illnesses to share their stories and connect with others.

It has truly been amazing seeing the development and growth of Emily’s success and The Invisible Illnesses. When her project kicked off on the CofC campus, many people were moved by the stories and were unaware of how many classmates suffered quietly. It is inspiring to watch how Emily and her team have expanded the awareness from the CofC campus to now, world-wide through 70 feature stories and 30 campus representatives at universities across the country.

Emily travels around the country to speak at different schools, events, and conferences about her experience with cyber bullying and mental health. Her courage to share her story has allowed many others to follow and open up about their experiences. This year at the Jefferson Awards, Emily received the Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis Award for Public Service. This is an award won by some of the most prestigious public figures including Oprah Winfrey and Steve Jobs.

Emily shared the most rewarding aspect of creating The Invisible Illnesses Organization: “The entire mission of this organization is to help those silently struggling to know they are not alone. So, it is incredibly rewarding because we have been able to create a support system for those who share and let those who are still hiding their struggles know it’s OK to get help.”

A recent college graduate is on her way to changing the world and has already affected the lives of many individuals. Remember, you are what you put your mind to, and you can accomplish anything no matter your age.

If you’d like to learn more about The Invisible Illnesses, please visit https://www.theinvisibleillnesses.org/.

Jul 05

Focusing on the Good Part I: Believe in Yourself

There are many, many worthwhile projects one can participate in, and truly make a difference.

Today and tomorrow, Peppercomm’s Taylor Shawver will talk about two in particular that are near, and dear, to her heart (and should be of interest to you as well):

Focusing on the Good Part I: Believe in Yourself 

With so much craziness in the world around us, it’s easy to forget all of the good that is happening.

This two-part blog post series is dedicated to those who are doing good things and making this world a better place.

Sometimes, the most important conversations have a tendency to get lost in the mix of breaking news and “hot topics.” Conversations such as positive body image and cyber bullying are not always at the forefront of our daily news. Thankfully, there are people out there who, despite all of the other “stuff” going on, remember the importance of these topics and strive to raise awareness about them.

Sam Sisakhti, CEO of UsTrendy, a popular online shopping site for young women and juniors, created the Believe in Yourself Project after growing increasingly concerned about the cyber bullying and body shaming he sees online.

As a young woman, this topic hits close to home for me. Positive body image is not a main subject covered in school or health class. I cannot tell you how many times I have heard friends and strangers comment on how they wish they looked like a celebrity, model, or Instagram influencer. The feeling of needing to compare yourself to others can be stronger than ever with the use of social media, and the models we constantly see as society’s “ideal” women.

The past few months, Sam has traveled throughout the United States delivering dresses to underprivileged girls as well as bringing in guest speakers to talk with them about building a positive body image. With hundreds of dresses already donated, the project is on its way to donating 10,000 dresses by the end of the year.

This summer the project is beginning its national mentoring programs. These programs will feature weekly interactive meetings in various cities across the country as well as in online seminars to reach girls all over the world. The meetings will include open-table discussions where women will mentor and have conversations with girls about creating and maintaining a positive body image, and how to combat and deal with cyber bullying.

The increasing emphasis on social media emanates higher levels of bullying and body shaming. People are more apt to compare their life with someone else’s on social media. Sam saw this issue and decided to take action, helping girls all across the world by opening the conversation. I believe this open dialogue will allow for greater awareness as well as help young girls to realize the importance of these issues and how to deal with them.

If you’re interested in learning more about the Believe in Yourself Project, please visit http://www.believeinyourself.org/.

When people have problems, they come to Uncle Bo

Image

I never thought I’d see the day when a New York City mayoral election bore a striking resemblance to the nightmare that was the 2016 presidential election. But, I have. And, it’s beyond frightening.

In one corner we have the abysmal, incumbent Mayor, Bill De Blasio who, a la Hill, promises more of the same (which included alienating the entire NYC police department and enabling the city’s homeless problem to rival levels we haven’t seen in 20 years).

In the other corner is a bold, brash, belligerent dude who, rather than promising jobs, guarantees a major crackdown on crime (in spite of NYC’s having recorded its lowest crime rate in years). The Trump clone is named Bo Dietl, and he is a real piece of work.

A retired NYC policeman and private detective, Dietl’s claim to fame is doing whatever it took to defend his highly controversial clients, and bully those who had initiated lawsuits against them. The end result?  The accuser either settled out of court or dropped the lawsuit entirely.

Dietl, who bills himself as “the tough cop”, has hounded people who say they’ve been traumatized and victimized. He’s been accused multiple times of intimidation and harassment. Check out this Times piece for a complete overview of Mr. Dietl’s life and times.

So, for whom has Dietl done dirty deeds for?

  • Sean Bannon (alleged spousal abuse)
  • Bill O’Reilly (workplace harassment)
  • Roger Ailes (see above)
  • Don Imus (see: Rutgers women’s basketball team)
  • The Trump family

But, that’s just the tip of the iceberg.

In his quest for City Hall, Dietl has “made a racially-charged comment involving the mayor’s wife, sent an obscenity-laced text to the chairman of the Reform Party on Staten Island and been criticized for failing to pay $477,000 in state taxes.”  Remind you of anyone?

Dietl even represented the pre-POTUS himself.

It was a case in which Mr, Dietl said someone was causing “trouble” for a Trump Casino in Atlantic City. Dietl’s solution? Simple. He called “the man” and threatened to release compromising information about him if the problem did not go away. The problem went away.

All of this would be mildly amusing if the Times article didn’t suggest that Dietl has a legitimate chance of winning the election.

We already have one leader playing loose and fast with reality. The last thing New York City needs right now is a localized version of the above.

But, hey, since I see this as a problem, maybe I can take it to Uncle Bo?

Jun 26

You’re a C+ Leader – Now What?

The Betsy Plank Center at the University of Alabama has long been seen as one of the true sources of thought leadership in our industry. Their most recent report shows a yawning gap between how industry leaders perceive themselves versus the rank-and-file reporting to them. A special shoutout to Bill Heyman, the Babe Ruth of executive recruiting, who helped spearhead this seminal report.

Peppercomm’s Culture Czar, Sara Whitman’s has written today’s guest post with her take on the findings: 

The grades are in and it looks like we will see each other in summer school.

This year’s Plank Center Report Card on PR Leaders shows slipping grades in key categories like work culture, job engagement and job satisfaction. Overall, our industry leaders fell from a B- in 2015 to C+ in 2017.

Add to this an increasing gender gap between the perceptions of men and women from 2015 to 2017 in every area evaluated. Yes, that’s across the board and in every subject. Among them, engagement levels – while surprisingly high compared to national averages for engagement – took a hit, dropping from 59.7% in 2017 to 57.2% in 2015 – with female employee engagement levels driving that number down.

And then there’s this doozy: industry leaders gave themselves an overall grade of A-, while their employees say their leaders are more like a C+. Even worse, that discrepancy was exactly the same in 2015.

Ouch. Have we learned nothing?

Bill Heyman, CEO and president of Heyman Associates, co-sponsor of the study and long-time Peppercomm friend, said: “Social tensions in our world today have likely exacerbated these issues. We need to be bigger leaders to close these gaps.”

So what do these bigger leaders need to do? Here are three places to start:

1. Face the firing squad. Clearly we’re not listening if we’re consistently viewing ourselves as performing at a higher level than employees think we are. The trouble is we need to be willing to look in the mirror to close this gap. The best ways to do so – and some of what we do at Peppercomm – is to solicit anonymous 360-feedback, ensure you have anonymous suggestion boxes (digital of course!) and occasionally bring in a third-party resource to gather and deliver feedback.

2. Don’t be fooled. PR is an industry with an exceptionally high percentage of female employees. Leaders can’t trick themselves into believing this means equality and declare success in conquering the gender gap. Despite the numbers, gender disparity still exists and has deepened over the years, at least according to this report card. A concentrated effort on helping female employees lift each other up and to have a voice is incredibly important. Organizations need to do a thorough analysis of pay structure and pay gaps, and make a plan to address any issues. Instituting unintentional bias training is another smart investment. It’s 2017 and this issue shouldn’t be on the list anymore. Let’s get on it and move forward.

3. Practice what you preach. The whole shoemaker’s children analogy is getting old. We’re communicators. Let’s communicate. It’s unacceptable that some of the best communicators on the planet are leading organizations where shared decision-making is an exception and not the rule. Or where two-way communications is inconsistent at best. Isn’t that the foundation of the entire industry? I don’t have to give recommendations on how to address this. All PR industry leaders know the best practices. It’s time to practice them.

The good news – if there is any – is that we’re not failing yet. But if we don’t start studying and applying what we learn, that’s exactly where our industry leaders are headed.

Jun 22

Are Silicon Valley VC’s Exhibiting Signs of Early-Onset Alzheimer’s?

I ask the question in response to a headline in today’s New York Times business section, headlined: “Uber’s Lesson: Silicon Valley’s Start-Up Machine Needs Fixing.”The article pertains to wild child par excellence, Travis Kalanick’s ouster as Uber’s CEO this past Tuesday.

Farhad Manjoo’s analysis rightly points out that Uber’s problems were systemic and “a failure of Silicon Valley’s start-up machine.”

While not excusing Kalanick’s behavior, Manjoo places the blame for his frat house, take-no-prisoners culture on “…investors, boards of directors and anyone else who could have altered Uber’s course and clearly failed to do so.”

No argument from me. My question is this: Where were these VC’s, directors and others during the halcyon days of the dotcom era?

I can personally attest to having represented dotcom CEO’s (and their fawning staffs) who made Kalanick’s actions pale in comparison.

The dotcom CEO’s ranted and raved, openly dissed direct reports and agency partners alike and fostered truly toxic environments. And, no one said a word.

I recall an Israeli tech start-up CEO who commandeered our office space until his own was ready. He’d walk up-and-down our hallways screaming at whoever was on the other end of the phone and completely disrupting our productivity.

But, hey, he was paying us $40,000 a month and had given us stock options that would be worth millions once the start-up went public. So, what was a fledgling PR firm to do other than to suck it up and endure the abuse?

Another dotcom client employed a 22-year-old CMO who swore like a longshoreman and routinely screamed and yelled at our team (and her own hapless direct reports) in weekly meetings.

The CEO loved the young woman’s chutzpah and egged her on (and on). But, hey, they were paying us $35,000 per month and had also handed over options worth millions. (Note: PR Week proceeded to name this young hellion one of “PR’s up-and-coming stars”. Talk about not doing one due diligence. Ouch!).

Many of the meetings described above were attended by a lead investor, a partner from the VC that had provided an ungodly amount of seed money for a business model that made no sense whatsoever and would laugh out loud as their prototype Kalanick spat venom and expletive-laced epithets that would embarrass today’s hate mongers.

So, why is Uber a sudden wake-up call to Valley investors? Were they on lengthy sabbaticals during the 1990s? Or, did they conveniently “forget” the horrific behavior of the Travis Kalanick’s of yesteryear in search of the next big kill? It’s truly baffling.

Afterword: It should come as no surprise that the two dotcom CEOs described above went bust, along with their “game-changing”, profitless start-ups when the tech sector tanked.

I wouldn’t be surprised to learn that many of those once-upon-a-time masters of the universe cum Neanderthals are now Uber drivers who insult passengers in the exact same way they did employees and agency partners 20 years ago.

 

 

Jun 20

The Progress on Purpose

Arthur W. Page Member Marcia DiStaso recently authored a Page Turner blog that provides a deep dive into 70 organizations, revealing the progress they have, or haven’t, made in determining their Purpose, Corporate Character, Mission, Values, Principles and Beliefs.

I purposely provided that laundry list since, as DiStaso’s research pointed out, different organizations use any, or all, of the above terms to more or less describe the same thing. (Note: I found the very same lack of consensus when I recently interviewed 23 CCOs and CMOs on behalf of The Institute For Public Relations. If memory serves, not one respondent described digital in the same way.)

But, back to DiStaso’s work. She found that:

– 73 percent of respondents had examined or redefined their mission/vision/purpose in the past three years, and 43 percent had done so in the past year;

– 67 percent had examined or redefined their values/principles/beliefs in the past three years; and 36 percent has done so in the past year; and

– More than one-quarter indicated their organization needs to examine or redefine corporate character (which, in my opinion,  means they haven’t done a thing).

I found the report fascinating since we’re knee-deep in defining an updated Purpose that will align with our re-positioning and branding. While we’ll remain a public relations firm at heart we will, in fact, be digitally-driven. Indeed, we’ve hired scores of researchers, designers, digital strategists, data analytics specialists and an HVAC repairman named Harry. I’m still trying to figure out his role in the grand scheme of things.

For those organizations that have succeeded in defining their “new” corporate character, CEO buy-in was a MUST. So, too, were “getting the semantics right”; “ensuring buy-in at all levels”; “aligning with business strategy”; and “keeping it simple”. I’ve found the latter is usually a deal breaker whenever decisions are made by consensus.

A few other interesting tidbits:

– More B2C companies have a defined corporate character that do their B2B counterparts (I’m not sure if the first cohort did, or didn’t, include Uber. Regardless, the company needs yet another new Purpose).

– More non-US companies have a defined corporate character than those in the good, old U.S. of A. That was a bit of stunner for me.

– And larger organizations were far more likely to have a Purpose than small businesses. That seems obvious since the latter can’t invest the same level of time or resources to examine all of the elements that comprise corporate character.

One last point: ALL respondents from the consumer packaged goods and telecommunications industries had a defined Purpose.

Many in the technology, food & beverage, healthcare/pharmaceutical, financial services and energy fields were laggards, pure and simple. That’s puzzling, if not downright troubling.

It strikes me that, in an era marked by fake news, hate crimes, intense divisiveness and god knows what else, a carefully-defined corporate character has never been more important. It does far more than address why you exist and what higher purpose you serve; it provides something of a safe harbor for every organization’s constituent audience in the tsunami-like seas of 2017. And, lord knows, we need as many safe harbors as we can find.

Jun 14

Why am I not surprised?

As loyal Repman readers are well aware, the two bete noirs of my professional life are “traveling” on New Jersey Transit and United Airlines, respectively.

Not too long ago, NJT was named the nation’s worst commuter mass transit system. In my mind, the recognition was well-deserved and long overdue.

Now, Jenna Seter, a content marketing and business analyst with Clutch, has published a survey of 1,000 consumers that showed 53 percent will NOT purchase tickets from United Airlines. Seter linked the airline’s abysmal ratings to the highly publicized “mugging” of a passenger who refused to surrender his seat to a deadheading United pilot.

While I don’t disagree, I think the most recent fiasco is just the latest in a long line of miscues mixed in with system-wide incompetence and the negative attitudes of so many United gate agents and flight attendants with whom I’ve parried about excessive delays and/or a complete lack of communications as to why a flight had been delayed or, worse, canceled.

United’s problems began when they merged with Continental and proudly announced, “It’s not who’s merging that counts. It’s what’s about to emerge.” Had they only added the words “complete chaos”, the airline would at least have been authentic in its brand promise.

And, that’s what leads me to my central point. United may be at the bottom of every list when it comes to service  and quality, but they top my list of disingenuous corporations that guarantee one experience in their marketing (i.e. “Fly the friendly skies”) but provide the polar opposite in the real world.

The first step to overcoming alcoholism is to admit one is an alcoholic. I’d like to suggest United stop it’s “feel good” marketing and admit that theirs is a badly broken system.

Americans are quick to forgive a major transgression if the transgressor admits fault and vows to make things right. Seter’s research is yet another confirmation that America’s not buying what United’s selling. And we won’t until they yank down their phony brand promises, own their dysfunctional ways and promise to make things right.

Jun 08

Stimulus: Response

I used to work for an ad agency who loved to use the expression ‘stimulus: response.’

He especially loved to trot it out in new business meetings. He’d set it up by showing a clip depicting a sweaty, shifty-eyed Richard M. Nixon saying, “I am not a crook.”

The CEO would painstakingly explain that, while Nixon was trying to reassure Americans that he hadn’t laundered $1 million in hush money to keep E. Howard Hunt & Co., quiet about the White House’s direct involvement in the Watergate break-in, the word crook had, instead, elicited the exact opposite response in peoples’ minds.

The CEO would conclude by saying stimulus: response was key to any effective advertising and was carefully considered when we crafted the brilliant creative about to be unveiled.

I raise this rather ancient positioning & branding anecdote because White House Spokesperson, Sarah Huckabee Sanders, committed nearly the exact same stimulus: response mistake as Nixon did when, in answering reporters’ questions in today’s post-Comey hearing “gaggle”, she said, “President Trump is not a liar.”

Bad. Sad. Pathetic.

A spokesperson, any spokesperson, is trained to never, ever, repeat a reporter’s negative question. Why? Because it’s almost guaranteed to become a headline or “call out” in any subsequent coverage.

Huckabee Sanders should have been mindful of the time-worn journalistic expression, “If it bleeds, it leads.”

I’m not qualified to rate the performance of the current administration, but I am more than a tad credentialed to critique the verbals and non-verbals of White House Spokespeople such as Huckabee Sanders and Sean “Where is he now?” Spicer. In my opinion each has set new lows in terms of transparency and common decency in their dealings with the Fourth Estate.

And, now, with her regrettable words, Huckabee Sanders has armed my long-retired CEO with an update for his stimulus: response lectures (which I can almost guarantee he is still serving up to some poor, unsuspecting soul in the wilds of Durango, Colorado).

Today, Huckabee Sanders learned what so many seem to forget: Those who ignore the mistakes of the past are bound to repeat them.

 

Jun 06

Number please

As a little boy, I always dreamt of one day becoming a telephone operator. Sure, other kids thought it far cooler to be cops, firemen and underwriters, but I was entranced by the romantic life of a telephone operator.

I’d lie awake nights imagining myself manning a switchboard in some godforsaken backwater, but dressed like James Bond, sipping a vodka martini (shaken, not stirred) and nonchalantly helping a complete stranger track down the phone number of a long lost lover, estranged family member or maybe even Money Penny herself.

Alas, I jest. I actually aspired to play centerfield for the Mets and bat lead-off just like my childhood hero, Tommie Lee Agee. Sadly, I was caught up in an early steroids scandal and my dream quickly turned to ashes (heavily-muscled ashes, but ashes nonetheless).

I dialed-up the “young Steve Cody as telephone operator wanna-be” tall tale for a short and not so sweet reason: a recent Bureau of Labor Statistics survey says telephone operators rank third on a list of the top 10 occupations most likely to disappear within a decade. The cause isn’t the hoax otherwise known as global climate change but, rather, robotics and artificial intelligence (A.I.).

Getting back to the dead pool and which career is most vulnerable, you’d be correct if you guessed locomotive firers.

In case you didn’t know (and shame on you for not being more aware of the world around you), locomotive firers are responsible for monitoring instruments on trains as well as watching for signals and dragging equipment. Dragging equipment? I can’t speak for you, but dragging locomotives doesn’t strike me as a fun way of spending the next 40 years of one’s life.

The firers edged out your friends and mine, motor vehicle electronic equipment installers and repairers (a career I briefly considered pursuing after graduating from high school).

As you already know, your friendly local telephone operators finished third. They were followed by postal service sorters (a real bummer for Newman fans everywhere) and shoe machine operators and tenders (one wonders if shoe machine tenders are as gentle as their job titles would suggest?).

You can check the article for the five other occupations that will soon join their horse-and-buggy maker colleagues in the special section of Elysian Fields set aside for those who don’t anticipate what’s next.

But, fear not. All is not lost.

In fact, one university in particular, Northeastern, has thought long and hard about the plight of everyone from locomotive fixers and motor vehicle electronic equipment installers to toll booth and telephone operators alike.

My alma mater’s visionary president, Joseph Aoun, began putting in place a revolutionary curriculum years ago that, he says, will graduate “robot-proof students.” This WashPo piece spells it out in far more eloquent prose than I ever could.

NU, which was one of the first universities to offer the cooperative education (AKA Co-Op) model, has extended and expanded the novel program globally while at the same time doubling down in such white hot emerging sectors as nanoscience, marine biology and computer design.

Co-Op is the school’s special sauce. It’s a five-year program that perfectly balances classroom theory with real world business experiences directly related to one’s major. Mix-in decades-long partnerships with mega corporations and more recent hook-ups with tech hub hot shots and you’ve got yourself all the ingredients needed to produce robot-free graduates.

And Northeastern is helping the individual who is already in the workforce stay relevant or change a career. For example, ALIGN allows individuals to combine their current background with new knowledge in tech and computer science and CAMD helps busy executives and current students update skills in the arts, media and design.

Traditional liberal arts schools are desperately trying to play catch-up, but how can students with little more than a sheepskin and a summer internship at TGI Fridays possibly compete with those who boast 24 months of on-the-job experience in robot-proof fields? It’s like asking the lowly New York Jets to blow away the world champion New England Patriots at Foxboro.

I could go on, but I’m handling the midnight shift at the Middletown, NJ, train station and need to call the operator for the number of the nearest locomotive dragging service. Those babies are heavy!

 

May 22

What’s a poor Millennial to do?

Last week I shared some rather alarming intelligence from the advertising agency, Hill Holiday, warning brands of all stripes about the severe implications of being caught creating or sharing fake news.

The HH research said consumers will drop brands that share fake news faster than Trump dumped former FBI Director James Comey a week or so ago.

Troubling new research from Research Now has only fanned the flames. It shows that Millennials, in particular, struggle when it comes to determining what’s real and what isn’t.

Considering so many Millennials are being asked to disseminate news on both the client and agency sides of our august industry, that’s akin to pouring gasoline on fire (i.e. If Millennial communicators can’t tell what’s true and what isn’t, what’s to prevent them from unknowingly sharing fake news on their company’s/client’s social channels and damaging, if not destroying, long-standing relationships between the brand and its constituents?).

It turns out the 1,100 Millennials surveyed struggle to determine what’s real and what isn’t. That’s because they aren’t being taught the critical thinking skills that were part and parcel of every college curriculum prior to their arrival on campuses a decade or so back.

In fact, 44 percent of the Millennials surveyed by Research Now received an “F” when the company evaluated their critical thinking skills and the ability to identify fake news. And, only 36 percent of Millennials surveyed said they were well-trained in critical thinking. Indeed, a shocking 37 percent readily admitted to having already shared fake news on their social channels.

Holy mega disaster in the making, Batman!

Critical thinking, you see, is paramount in determining if what one reads is true or false. And, according to the World Economic Forum, next to complex problem-solving, critical thinking will be the SECOND most important skill a college graduate will need to possess in 2020.

So, what’s a poor Millennial to do?

In my mind, the answer is elementary, my dear Watson. Do what every trained journalist is required to do before filing a story of any type: verify the news from a trusted second source.

So, if like most Millennials, you rely solely on social media news for information and entertainment, admit to routinely sharing that online content (55 percent) or have already accidentally shared fake news (36 percent), just do the right thing. Double check the “news” with articles in The Wall Street Journal, The New York Times, a trusted industry trade publication or another source whose integrity for accuracy is impeccable. If it doesn’t pass the sniff test, hit delete.

Having said that, ferreting out fake news is a challenge for communicators of all ages. See how well you fare in this test of recent events:

https://www.buzzfeed.com/janelytvynenko/fake-news-quiz-may15?utm_term=.mqLMQ12x0#.tf04J5q0j

I won’t tell you my score. If I did, I’d probably be interviewing for a job at Edelman as we speak.

Sadly, this is no laughing matter. In fact, it’s an issue that should concern our industry’s top trade groups ranging from the Institute for Public Relations (www.IPR.org) and The Arthur W. Page Society (www.awps.org) to the PR Council (www.prcouncil.net) and PRSA’s Counselors Academy (www.caprsa.com.)

PR professionals pride ourselves on being the ethical and moral compass of the organization. How can we continue to say that if young practitioners no longer possess built-in BS detectors?

Last, but not least, this should be a clarion call to the PR, journalism, communications and marketing academics who are (or, as the study suggests, aren’t) teaching students to develop critical thinking abilities. That’s where the crux of the problem begins and that’s where it should be immediately addressed.

By the time we hire Millennials, their sloppy news-checking habits have already been formed. And, unless we insist they check and re-check facts before passing them along, you’ll see more and more organizations take a huge hit for spreading fake news (and firing the agencies who enabled it to happen).

And a tip of Rep’s Critical Thinking Cap to Cat Cody for suggesting this post.