Jim Horton points to a Fast Company interview with Mona Williams, VP of Corporate Communications at embattled Wal-Mart.
“First, we determine if the criticism is valid or if it’s generated by people who are simply looking out for their own self-interest. We’ve found that there is some of both. Where it is valid, we learn from it and become a better company.”
Colin McKay has unearthed an interesting lengthy paper that looks at the changing dynamics of communication and reputation being created by the Internet – and how people are developing strategies to help them cope with information overload.
This kind of thinking is important for PR practitioners. Online communication increasingly requires a deeper understanding of how people find, use and share information. Furthermore, if you are truly interested in Public Relations, then your expertise will need to extend across all audiences and media, not just the traditional suspects.
“But for inbound reputation � the reputation that others form about you � there will be a shifting balance between your right to privacy and the reputation former�s right to share and collaborate with others. Those with public functions � politicians, doctors, lawyers, professors, and so forth � can expect to be more exposed in roles where others have legitimate interests. A dentist�s reputation as a dentist may be public, while the same dentist�s reputation as a debater need not be. It is easy to foresee intense debates, differing legal interpretations, and the emergence of customs on this issue, similar to existing tensions on the desirable scope of intellectual property rights.”
The authors Hassan Masum and Yi-Cheng Zhang are writing a book based on the paper called “The Reputation Society”.
I just came across Neville Hobson’s blog on business communication and technology. He notes that there’s now an RSS-feed based calendar application available that enables you to share your calendar – and update it over RSS. A great example of innovative thinking.
Murphy's Law 