PR for Protesters

Like much of the world, I’ve been following the development of the Occupy movement over the last five weeks with keen interest. This isn’t our parents’ activist movement. The Occupy movement has the makings of the internet era's first true political movement.

Unlike the civil rights movement of a half-century ago, what makes the Occupy movement different is that there really isn’t any one leader at the forefront acting as the movement’s public face. This is a completely democratic movement, in that all decisions are made by consensus by protesters at daily assemblies. It is what makes it so complex and unprecedented from a public relations standpoint.

I stumbled across a blog by leading PR expert David Meerman Scott addressing the public relations obstacles facing the occupy movement. Here is some PR advice Scott gives for those involved.

Put a face to your organization

As mentioned, the Occupy movement has no official spokesperson. This is a problem from public relations standpoint. Since the movement has no clear mouthpiece, news outlets are instead finding celebrity surrogates. The movement claims to be carrying in the tradition of the Arab Spring tactic. This is not entirely true. That movement found a media spokesperson in Wael Ghonim. The Occupy movement needs to find itself a public face, or else the media will decide for itself who that person should be. The results could prove disastrous.

Give your website some personality

The movement’s official website unfortunately seems almost as impersonal as the banks and the corporations they are protesting against. The blog posts on the website are written by "OccupyWallSt" rather than a human. The contact information listed on the site is anonymous too.

Clearly articulate what you want

The Occupy movement prides itself on its broad mandate, but this is not doing them any favours. There must be a more concrete and consistent driving force behind the movement if it wants to stay relevant.

Is Scott's analysis of the Occupy movement rooted in a dated twentieth-century marketing perspective or are his concerns valid?