Andy Carter's Blog

Read, see and hear my random ramblings

Email is dull - sending a letter has more impact

I received a letter this morning.

It's the first for ages.  The usual stuff that lands on the doormat is bills, flyers for the local supermarket and its cheap booze deals and a thrice-weekly junk offering from BT inviting me to sign up to its broadband.

BT must have sent me hundreds of these annoying leaflets over the years.  I've still not signed up and on point of principle, I never will either.  You would have thought it would realise by now.

So, back to my letter.

It was from someone who I respect as a former colleague and value as a good friend.  This person had faith in me when they asked me to take on a top role within their organisation.

They could have said what they said in an email or broken it down into bursts of 140 characters and sent it as a message via Twitter.  Efficient, yes - but dull and without much impact.

Putting pen to paper (or in this case typing) makes such a difference.  I've re-read it several times and intend sharing it with other close friends.

Now, this letter has pride of place in my 'special things to be kept' file.

It prompted me to read some of the other things in there - a letter from the local MP for one of the radio stations I managed - letters from senior councillors who I worked with at Leeds - correspondence from a businessman who I worked with for six months in 1993 ... and the last letter from my dad before he died in 1988.

(That letter still makes me cry by the way even two decades on).

I've also found a letter sent to me by my sister when I was about nine and she was seven while I was away on a school trip to Butlins at Bognor Regis.

(To put this into context, Bognor is about an hour away from Winchester where I lived at the time and despite being there for only a week, my mum wrote to me three times and my dad twice.)

My sister managed just one letter and a picture.

Her correspondence is amusing because it reveals quite a lot about what is going on in the mind of a seven year old.

I'm sure she won't mind me re-printing it:

Dear Andy

I hope you are having a good time.  Sorry I did not write to you before because I could not think of anything to say.

[Clearly, she wasn't missing me that much then].

I have got good news for you.  I past (sic) my ballet exam and I got highly commended.  It was the second highest.

We got a post card this morning, thank-you for it.  [A slight diversion from the main topic here].

Maria [my sister's highly competitive cousin] got commended for her ballet exam because she got good all the way through her report and I got very good.

Mummy and daddy are very pleased.

I have got the television in my bedroom, hope you are happy I miss you, please come back soon.

Lots and lots and lots of love, Rebecca [oh perhaps she was missing me after all].

Her ballet exam success was clearly a big deal, because believe me, getting the TV to yourself in your bedroom was a special treat (even in those days when you could only receive a few channels).

Anyway, the moral of my 'story' is this - if the weather's a bit crap where you are this weekend, write a letter to someone you love or care for.  I'm sure it will brighten their day.

Forget ‘sorry’ - ‘goodbye’ is the hardest word

As you can see, I’ve not written a blog entry for a very long time and as a communications professional who claims to like social media, it probably isn’t good enough.

 

Well, events of the last few days are of such significance, it justifies my first entry for ages.

 

It’s been a tough week.  Emotionally, a bit of a rollercoaster.

 

Telling my boss that I was planning to leave my council was bad enough - but 24 hours later when I had to tell my team, it was even worse.

 

I chose an unsuspecting colleague from another department to practice on first - she must have wondered what had hit her.  I’d barely closed the door before the waterworks began.

 

I’m 38, so this was all a bit embarrassing.  However, my colleague reassured me it was OK to cry and that it wasn’t silly.

 

On that basis, I got my number two in next to warn him what I was about to do.

 

I remember telling him that I was about to announce a ‘bombshell’ bit of news, but my memory of how I managed to get out the actual detail of my departure is still a bit hazy.

 

Then, when my team was in the room - all eyes trained on me - it suddenly became really difficult.

 

My announcement was just a jibberishy splutter and lacked all of the coherency that I had hoped for when I went over the words I wanted to say on the train ride in.

 

Why so tough then?

 

I had to deliver my news to a group of people who I’ve come to love and respect after having worked with them almost every day for over three years.

 

They welcomed me into their PR world in 2008 and I’ve not looked back since.

 

Their support, dedication and loyalty has been unending and as a team we’ve achieved so much.

 

Communications at Leeds City Council has been transformed because of their hard work and input.

 

We’ve been on amazing journey together, but now it is coming to an end.

 

And that’s why it’s tough - I feel like I’m dumping them by the roadside, while I cruise off on a new adventure.  That’s not the case and my team doesn’t think it is either thank goodness.

 

In fact, they’ve all taken the time to wish me well.  I’ve had some fantastic emails and text messages too.  It has been all a bit overwhelming frankly.

 

That's why I think this week does prove the point that saying sorry might be tough for some, but ‘goodbye’ is by far the hardest word - for me anyway.

 

What can the BBC afford to get rid of?

I had dinner with a former radio colleague of mine tonight - in fact it’s this man’s fault that I ever got into radio in the first place.

He foolishly once let me go on air during his hospital radio news programme and I was bitten by the broadcast bug.

It was onwards and upwards in my journalist career from there - so thanks Ed!

Ed is now a big cheese in TV news and from his desk at Television Centre helps run the BBC’s news operation. If something exciting or important is happening in any corner of the UK, Ed likely knows about it and has worked out a way of bringing it alive on television.

As is typical - once you’ve caught up on all the news from the 20 years that you’ve not seen each other, a debate about a big ‘issue’ normally starts.

Our chat over a burger at the Westfield shopping centre was no different.

Given the fact that both our organisations are facing significant cuts, we got on to the subject of what we both thought the BBC should get rid of.

I thought that perhaps regional TV news might be for the chop.

I suggested that from next year when ITV doesn’t have to ‘do’ local news, perhaps the Beeb might not bother either.

My debating partner wasn’t convinced. He reckoned BBC regional TV news and local radio output was pretty safe as it didn’t cost a fortune.

So then, what about BBC Three or Four - could they go?  I wasn’t too sure and neither was Ed.

Then we got onto the BBC news channel.

Agreement at last! My view: if Sky wants to run an expensive continuous news service and Mr Murdoch is happy to bank roll it, let it/him carry on.

But, with a falling audience and rising repetition we decided that the BBC could switch off the news channel tomorrow and hardly anyone would notice.

Fewer people might not even care.

Ed didn’t favour taking the axe to it wholesale, but did think it could be scaled back - more output shared with BBC world news or maybe no rolling news after 1900.

Sounds reasonable to me. So, BBC. Perhaps that should be your strategy.

Stop doing continuous news, save yourself perhaps hundreds of millions of pounds and only have rolling coverage when there’s genuinely something exciting going on so there’s no need to have correspondents talking bollocks hour after hour end when lots of nothing-ness requires filling.

Job done!

Andy's Log: December 8

This is an abridged version of my weekly blog which I write for work.  The views I express in this log are my own, professional, views as the head of communications but do not necessarily reflect those of the authority itself.

I’m writing my log on Wednesday 8 December.  As usual I’m on the train on the way to work.  As usual it’s late.  However, the train company is blaming the snow for that.  The bad weather has been its default excuse for several days now.

I write this on the train because it gives me time to reflect on what’s been going on in the past seven days and it also means I’m not doing it in ‘work time’.
Anyway, today is the anniversary of John Lennon’s assassination.

This morning, the presenter on the BBC Breakfast news programme said something like ‘we reflect on the murder that shocked the whole world’.

I was only half listening because I was cutting up my ham sandwiches at the time, but the use of the phrase ‘shocked the whole world’ struck me.

Did John Lennon’s murder really ‘shock the whole world?’  Surely not everyone in the world was shocked?  Actually, it might be that not everyone in the world knew about his assassination given the fact the communications tools and channels that have shrunk our planet to a global village didn’t exist then.

‘Shock’ is an overused cliché – especially by the media.  If ‘shock’ was a vinyl record (remember those?) it would be scratched to destruction by now.

Everything is ‘shocking’ these days.  I can picture the headlines:

‘Granny mugged in XYZ Town – whole community shocked’
‘Council plans to close libraries: shocked locals react’

It’s a bit like TV news bulletins when they report on the arrest of a person for some terrible crime, like murder.  The TV crew interviews the person’s next door neighbour and they say ‘he/she seemed like such a nice person and they kept themselves to themselves …’

What else would they say?

Having said all that, the media can’t possibly use the ‘shock’ word when it comes to telling their readers, viewers or listeners about the cutbacks in local government.

Why?  Well, because we’ve been preparing them for weeks about just how bad things are likely to be in future.

Yesterday we organised a press briefing to talk journalists through a report on my council’s future budget which will be discussed at next week’s executive board meeting.  

Although missing the detail (we’re still waiting for the government to tell us how much money we’re getting in the formula grant) it makes it clear that having £90 million less to spend next year is going to be a big challenge.

The report to executive board identifies areas where savings are likely to come from:  £30m from the wage bill, only doing urgent building maintenance work, closing some buildings and facilities and increased charges ... the ‘bad news’ goes on.

However, what was surprising was the lack of questions from the assembled members of Her Majesty’s press.  It could be that they were so ‘shocked’ at what they were hearing they were stunned into silence – or perhaps our revelation was hardly new news, given the fact they are hearing similar stories from lots of other public sector organisations.

In many ways, it would be have been good to be on the front page of the newspaper or leading the TV or radio news bulletin because then we could have driven home the message to residents that things are going to be different.

Elsewhere this week – a debate on who should officially be recognised as a ‘proper’ news gatherer.

At the weekend, I was pointed to a discussion on a journalism website about another city council’s decision to exclude a blogger from a briefing about cuts (like the one we did yesterday).  

There was much criticism of the council for its actions.

The basic argument was that this particular person should not have been banned from attending, even though she only reported for an online community news website.  Her website, it seems, has a good following.

So, where do you draw the line?  Press Card holders only? (holders are formally recognised as bona fide news reporters by the Association of Chief Police Officers so many other organisations do too) Or, do you let/invite everyone in?

My view is there needs to be a good reason why you exclude someone, rather than a reason for letting them in.  We have our own community blogger in Leeds in the form of John Baron who writes for the Local Leeds site.  We consider him to be a ‘proper’ journalist, so he gets invites.

But, someone who uses a 10-year-old Windows 2000 laptop to write a few words once in a while for their neighbours might not get an automatic right to attend a briefing – unless we’re proposing to close the library at the end of their street!

Andy's Log: July 20th

This is an edited/shortened version of my weekly blog which I write for work and is published on my council's intranet.  The views I express in this log are my own, professional, views as the head of communications but do not necessarily reflect those of the authority itself.

I’m going to refer back to my days as a broadcast journalist once again for the introduction to my log this week.

I used to look after more than 60 reporters and editors who were spread across 27 radio stations and one of my responsibilities, as the group head of news, was to provide legal advice to stations.

Usually it was guidance about how far the envelope could be pushed, but it was often to help out when the station had got into trouble. 

Reporters would ring and say ‘I said in the 3pm news that our local mayor’s limo had been seen parked up outside a strip club in the red light district of town and now he’s on the phone saying he’s going to sue for libel … what do I do?’

‘Hire a bloody good lawyer’ was my usual response.

The other issue was contempt of court.  For me, contempt of court is the fine line between being able to report on a really juicy story and not annoying the judge to the point where they send you to jail as well.

We got it wrong once and I had to face a really angry judge at Winchester Crown Court who wasn’t at all pleased that we ‘had threatened his trial’ with some rather inaccurate reporting at one of my stations.

I won’t bore you with the detail, but as they say, it was a real ‘squeaky bum’ moment as I stood in the dock and waited for His Honourship (no, I didn’t call him that) to decide my fate.  In the end he let me off, but it was a lesson hard learned.  It’s an experience I wouldn’t wish on anyone else.

Anyway, newspapers, radio and TV stations often publish or transmit loads of detail about crimes before the suspect(s) go to trial.  As the date of the court case approaches, the level of detail comes down and of course, when the trial is underway, the reporting has to be really ‘tame’ in order to ensure that the accused gets a fair hearing free from any ‘influence’ from the media.

I’ve always been interested in the debate about fair trials – is a jury really capable of erasing from their minds what they’ve read about a case in the newspapers, or watched on the TV?

A couple of years ago, the then director of public prosecutions publically said he was convinced they could.  They were, he argued, able and should be trusted to only make up their minds about someone’s guilt based on the evidence that was put before them and the court.

This was a crucial pronouncement because it sort of meant the media could almost publish ‘what it liked’ in the run-up to a trial and not influence the jury’s thinking – well according to the DPP anyway.


I’ve never been convinced about his argument and I remain dubious now.

It brings me to a modern twist on this tale, but this time it’s social media.

I acknowledge there are ‘grey areas’ with social media – nothing is truly black and white, but here’s a question.  Can social media ‘consumers’ tell the difference between the person and the profession?

Not everyone agrees.  Even in our office there were a range of views.

It’s an important point though, because for people, who let’s say use Twitter, for both personal and professional purposes, there’s a danger.

Take me for example.  I’m on Twitter.  I don’t have loads of followers, but there are a number of significant people who choose to read what I have to say.

Paul Napier is one of them.  He’s the editor of the Yorkshire Evening Post.  Is he following me as Andy Carter, head of communications or just Andy Carter?

What about the two councillors who are ‘signed up’ to my tweets?  Are they following me because of my professional or my personal reflections on life?

I don’t know to be honest, I’ve not asked them – but I think it does mean care is needed.

If you’re using social media – think carefully.  An innocent tweet or Facebook status update has the potential to be misunderstood, especially if what you say is in that grey area and it isn’t clear whether you’re being personal or professional at that point.

Having said all that – social media is a fantastic tool and should be used where appropriate.

Andy's Log: July 14th

This is an edited/shortened version of my weekly blog which I write for work and is published on my council's intranet.  The views I express in this log are my own, professional, views as the head of communications but do not necessarily reflect those of the authority itself.

When I was the news editor of a radio station in the countryside, I checked the shoe sizes of all of my journalists and bought us all a communal pair of wellingtons.

For my trainee reporter they were far too big and she looked a bit comical in them, but for the rest of us they were fine.  The reason I bought them?  Our newsroom was in the countryside and farming was an important and big issue for us.  The trouble with farming is that it meant mud and none of my journalists wanted their Hush Puppies ruined by a mucky cowshed.

Although I no longer work in the countryside, I could have done with a pair of wellies this last week.

That's because it has been like wading through mud, treacle, or wet concrete.

We (I say 'we' because I suspect most of my team has been involved at one point or another) ... have been dealing with a particular issue.

But because of the secrecy that surrounds this particular issue it was nearly impossible to get the answers we needed to defend the council.  For me it felt like we were 'fighting' with one hand tied behind our backs while we were also blindfolded.  The fact that we weren't able to get straight answers from our own colleagues was a massive frustration and meant we lost control of the story.

Fortunately, as a result of our experience this week, the head of service and the chief officer concerned are going to review the arrangements so we're in a much better position to deal with this kind of issue when it comes up in the future.

Yes, we have to protect members of staff who might otherwise be exposed to threats and serious danger, but they need to trust their colleagues and be honest with them.  After all, we're in this together.

Moving on.

The new minister for local government, Eric Pickles had a few interesting things to say last week when he addressed the local government association conference in Bournemouth.

His speech is here (http://www.communities.gov.uk/speeches/newsroom/lgaconference2010) if you want to have a read.  It's worth a look.
I suspect you won't agree with everything that Mr Pickles said, but I do think some of his ideas make sense.  Shared services for instance.

One issue I would argue with him is his attack on 'non jobs'.  Non jobs aren't exclusive to the public sector.

I did a quick search of a few recruitment sites and it wasn't long before I found an advert for an 'alcohol policy manager' with a salary of over £70,000!

(No, I've not downloaded the application form ...)

Something else that's worth a read, or at least a visit to, is the website set up by the government so we can all suggest ideas about saving money or creating extra revenue.  The site is here: http://spendingchallenge.hm-treasury.gov.uk/

Lots of the suggestions are good.  For instance, switching off every other street light between midnight and 5am all the way to major changes to benefits which could have the potential to save billions.

Two caught my eye though.

One.  'Sell Australia to the Australians'.  The person who logged this idea says the 'Australian prime minister could write a fat cheque and square things at their end'.  In the section where you include the benefits of your idea it says 'the Australians would be less dependent on us - which is what they want isn't it?'

The other suggests the idea of restricting tea and biscuits at council meetings, but says 'if you really have to serve biscuits to councillors, make sure they are horrible ones like Custard Creams or Garibaldis'.

I rather like Custard Creams AND Garibaldis!

Finally this week, in this bumper instalment - it's over to my readers.  Many of my colleagues sent me comments as a result of last week's log.  I’m delighted with their support and encouragement over my decision to have a word with Mr Messy.

On the issue of litter, my colleague Fiona emailed:

"Well done for challenging on the rubbish being left on the train! More people should do that.  On why people drop litter - I don't think it helps that people are encouraged to drop litter in railway stations and airports now. There are no bins any more, due to concerns about terrorists leaving explosive devices in them. I've asked in Leeds City Station in the past where I should put my litter and I've been told just to drop it on the platform, because they employ people to pick it up. I actually couldn't bring myself just to drop litter on the floor, so I took it home with me, but it's worth bearing in mind that people get conflicting messages on what to do with rubbish in public spaces.  As an aside, I lived in Germany for a few years and they have bins to separate rubbish into four different types on the platforms and in the trains, so it's possible."

Mrs X (she's very shy) also thought challenge was appropriate:

“I have family in New Zealand and have been fortunate to visit them.  You do not drop litter anywhere in New Zealand, not because its against the law but because it is a lack of respect. Respect is a very big thing out there. You do not vandalise parks because they belong to the people and it would be a lack of respect. Respect is very much part of their upbringing in school and at home. Consequently as you travel around the country no one throws rubbish from car windows, vandalises public parks and when I was there I did not see any graffiti. All the towns, villages have their own 'domain' (park) and all have workable toilets, clean and usable, and free. They would not dream of vandalising or dropping litter as these 'belong to the community' through rates and if any damage is done the rates would increase.  Maybe we should identify how much of the Council tax is used to repair/clean up buildings and streets from vandals and litter louts and respect to be encouraged."

And – my colleague Bernard has had his own encounter with a 'Mr Messy':

"Re your encounter on the train - good for you. It reminded me of a similar incident with me.  One lunch-time I was walking down towards Dortmund Square and, as I approached a parked car, the passenger opened the door and put his drinks can on the road at the side of the car. I decided to pick the can up, opened the car door, handed him the can and politely asked if he minded either finding a litter bin or taking his rubbish home. To say that he looked gobsmacked is somewhat of an understatement."

On 'promoting' the work of councillors, my colleague John - who used his blog to ask questions of politicians in the run up to the election - had this to say:

"I found [it] very useful in casting my vote, and I wonder whether we need something similar to explain the various roles of councillors better to the people of the city.  Just what can a councillor do for you? What's realistic to expect, and what can't they do?  Taking the storytelling approach, maybe we could illustrate the various bits of their work - on behalf of groups and individuals or even in pursuit of the things they believe in - with a few real examples? Maybe even tell the same story from the different points of view of various 'witnesses': a constituent, a councillor and some of the other people involved.  This approach could really show off the value of councillors, could increase the understanding of their role and how they work with council officers and other agencies in the city, and encourage the people of Leeds to choose them wisely and make the best use of them."

And on both subjects of litter and councillors, Rory who works in one of my council’s area management team comments:

"Just read your captain's log and your story of Mr Messy.  There is a direct link to the new approaches we are implementing to neighbourhood management, community engagement and building sustainable communities.  I have attached a copy of the community engagement strategy recently agreed for the inner East Area Committee and the original concept paper on 'Team Neighbourhood' that I hope you find of interest and relevance to the issues you are highlighting in your log.  Building sustainable communities has to involve local residents as integral to the process and only if we do so will we stand any chance of changing behaviours.  Peer pressure can be very powerful in this regard and I'm sure Mr Messy will be thinking twice before leaving his detritus on the train again, even if he did react defensively/aggressively to your challenge.  The Team Neighbourhood work and the role of new community leadership groups (resident groups chaired by the local councillor - see the community engagement strategy attached) approved by the area committees in inner east and inner north east also give a great indication of the work of local councillors at a neighbourhood level and at an area committee level."

Finally, I've agreed to give a plug to a petition which has been launched to 'save' the new generation transport (trolley bus) scheme in Leeds.

The petition has been started by the campaign group '38 degrees'.


Here's the link if you felt you were able to add your support: http://www.38degrees.org.uk/page/s/trolleybus

Thanks to Anne (she won't let me say which council team she works in) for tipping me off about it.

Andy's Log: July 7th

This is an edited/shortened version of my weekly blog which I write for work and is published on my council's intranet.  The views I express in this log are my own, professional, views as the head of communications but do not necessarily reflect those of the authority itself.

 
I travel to and from work on the train and yesterday I challenged a fellow passenger who was in the seat next to me.  It was because he left a load of rubbish on his flip down table.  I pointed out that there was a bin about 18 inches away.
 
He didn’t like it – but that’s perhaps no surprise.
 
I actually thought he was going to hit me.  Fortunately, that didn’t happen, possibly because of the presence of the young guy who dishes out the coffee.
 
Andrew Mason, who’s the chief officer for environmental services in my council, once told me that he couldn’t understand why people drop litter in the street when there’s a perfectly good bin nearby.  find that difficult to answer as well.
 
Interesting then that the most recent survey by the Local Government Association (LGA), which made the news in the last few days, found that most people want (among other things) bin collections and street cleaning ‘protected’ from cuts.
 
Bin collections I get – after all, someone has got to come and take away the rubbish, but street cleaning got me thinking.
 
Is it because people still want the ‘right’ to drop litter, chuck cigarette butts away or spill the contents of their stomach over the pavement on a Friday night and have someone else clear up the mess?
 
What annoyed me the most about Mr Messy is that he didn’t appear to be prepared to take any responsibility for his own actions.  He was the one who got on the train with a Cornish pasty, crisps and biscuits – they didn’t appear out of thin air and dump themselves on the table.
 
Perhaps, if people took more collective responsibility for their actions then we might not need to have colleagues out in the middle of the night clearing Park Row of empty beer bottles and two-for-one drinks flyers for instance.  Then there’s the issue of challenge.
 
OK, perhaps I was wrong to ‘tell off’ a fellow passenger (it was before 7.30am), but sometimes challenge is important.
 
Right now of course, our council, like many others, is being challenged about spending and being challenged to try and find more savings.  That’s the right thing to do because it could be argued (and I agree) that we have a collective responsibility to help get the country out of the place it finds itself in right now.
That brings me on to the project that I’m working on right now.
 
I – and several colleagues – have been tasked with developing a new model for communications in future.  At the very least it will mean better co-ordination of all our comms, PR, marketing and web functions/activities.
 
There are lots of people to tell about what we’re doing and we’ve deliberately chosen to set up face-to-face meetings and briefings.
 
It’s no surprise to us (and I’m sure you) that we’re being challenged about the project – the rationale behind it, the reasons why it’s necessary and about our brief to introduce a new corporate approach to communications.
 
We’ve had some pretty robust arguments in defence of the status quo – but as is often said ‘doing nothing is not an option.’
 
Eric Pickles, the minister for local government told the LGA conference yesterday (Tuesday) that he wants councils to share more services/functions and that communications should be one of them.
 
I think it’s a perfectly good idea and there’s no reason why we couldn’t merge with another authority’s communications team.  However, we would need to get our own house ‘in order’ before we could consider any merger ideas.
 
In ‘other news’ … I went to a meeting of political cabinet on Monday night to talk about what my team is doing and to update the leader and colleagues on the project I’ve just mentioned.
 
I’m pleased to report that they were very supportive of what we’re doing, but they were also quite challenging on a number of issues.
 
One is accountability.  The leader was keen that we do something which highlights the work of councillors and the democratic ‘framework’ they operate in.  The idea would be for the people of our city to better understand what councillors do and for people to better understand how they can be involved in how decisions are made.
 
Finally, we’ve had another ‘plug’ for our plain English work.
 
It was mentioned in the esteemed publication that is PR Week.  One of my colleagues was so excited that her photograph was used, she posted the link to the article on to her Facebook page.
 
So you don’t have to wade through my colleague’s birthday party pictures and snaps from her holiday to Malaga (I thought she was too old for that anyway) – to find the aforementioned link, it’s here for your convenience: http://www.prweek.com/uk/researchData/login/1013260/
 
More next week