Day: February 8, 2005

In my previous post I referenced Phil Gomes‘ view on why he doesn’t feel the need to rush to the defence of the PR profession. I also referenced Andy Lark‘s thoughts on transparency. When I was writing the post, I didn’t think the two would come together quite as quickly as they have.  Let me explain.

Two incidents I read about this morning brought both issues into focus.

News that Burson-Marsteller’s astroturfing on behalf of the bromine industry has been called out by the Center for Media and Democracy isn’t a surprise to anyone.  These ridiclous industry-backed “think tanks” staffed by PR flacks (I hate that term, but it’s appropriate in this context) bring this business and profession into disrepute.  This isn’t about communication ladies and gentlemen, this is about subterfurge and at best grey propoganda.

I won’t speak on behalf of others, but it says nothing to me about Public Relations, as I practice and understand it.  Furthermore, as a consumer, I find it distasteful and dishonest. Unfortunately no one cares.  As long as there’s money to be made, there will be organizations and individuals interested in grabbing it regardless of the consequences. This is where I begin to agree with Phil’s thoughts.  There is no blood on my hands so to speak, I am happy to criticize these practices, but I also accept that my criticism will do nothing to change the practice.

The problem with Andy’s PROTS idea is that you’ll find the only people willing to sign up will be the people who have nothing to hide.  Those operating in the murky underworld will stay there, happily counting the unmarked bills that are passed their way (I’m imagining the retainer being handed over in a dark car park).

So deception is reality to destroy an old PR adage.

But deception happens in many ways. Another incident I read today served to show just how stupid some marketing and PR people are in trying to create these deceptions.

If you’re planning some online marketing programs there’s something you should be aware of.  It’s really quite easy to track your identity.  It’s important to know that, particularly if you’re planning some really “clever” viral marketing ploy.  Ah yes, following some fantastic ground coffee and a nice danish pastry, you came up with a great viral campaign for your client.

“Let’s pretend we’re students, then we can target bloggers and get a whole viral marketing thing going.”

“What a great and unique idea! Let’s do it!”

One word: Stop.

Stop before you do more damage than good.  In the first place what you are suggesting is unethical – and if I’m expected to call unethical practice in PR, I’ll do the same for the rest of the marketing function.  Your mediocre attempts at hiding your real identity will, in all probability, fail.  The result of your actions will be, best-case, that you make your organization look like buffoons and worst-case you do serious damage to your client and your employer’s reputation.

Unfortunately this post is too late for the big brains over at Ogilvy. Oh yes.  Following the well beaten track of  “students” who are actually married, overweight marketers, Ogilvy have kicked out a blog outreach campaign posing as students.  I kid you not.  And what brand you may ask is all this sneaking around designed to promote?  Why American Express obviously. Obviously.

What a stupid stunt…. oh the vagaries of rhyming slang.

Bjoern Ognibeni, a freelance marketing consultant in Germany, was the recipient of one of these incredibly intelligent pitches.  Unfortunately for the clever agency folks, Bjoern was able to track their IP address all the way back to their danish pastry filled modern offices.

Read the post, heed the lesson.

I’m off for a danish.

Morning,

Things have been, and continue to be, a little crazy work wise, which is a limp excuse for a significant lack of posting recently.  Hopefully things will return to normal later in the week, in the meantime I can relax in the knowledge that there’s loads of interesting PR/Marketing posting going on elsewhere.  Here’s just a taster…..

 In the aftermath of various people and organizations failing to disclose their vested interests, Andy Lark wonders aloud about transparency for communicators.  There’s no doubt this is a growing issue, particularly in the ever changing web of content, links and opinions, but is there a way forward?  Andy, building on David Berlind’s idea of a Journalist’s Online Transparency System (JOTS), suggests a Public Relations Online Transparency System (PROTS).

“PROTS would cover a whole range of ground. It might include protocols for using third party spokespeople. And the use of anonymous spokespeople. In this instance, transparency is greater than anonymity. In other words, say who you are, what your title is and what you are saying. Don’t hide behind the veil of “spokesperson”.”

(David has some additional thinking on JOTS here.)

 

 Trevor Cook reports that, following his acceptance of an invitation to participate in a panel session at a Hill & Knowlton briefing on blogging, the invitation was rescinded because:

“….management didn’t feel ‘comfortable with presenting someone from a competitive agency as a speaker at one of our own events’.”

Petty, and ridiculous are words that jump to mind.  Why invite him in the first place? Is it any wonder PR practitioners aren’t taken seriously….

 

 Trevor also has posted an interview with Gerry McCusker, author of Talespin, a book on PR disasters.

“Talespin came to me after a non-PR pal got enmeshed in a PR disaster and when he relayed his plight, I wondered how many other people had had similar brushes with PR gaffes. Research showed there were numerous cases. And as someone who’s proud of my PR career, I wanted to show the complexity and perils of the PR arena so that people realised the skillset involved in executing good PR and the pitfalls we face. And if the book strikes people as an informative and enjoyable read, then that’s great, too.”

 

 Shel Holtz and Neville Hobson have released their sixth PR podcast (you should really be listening to these). This week’s installment includes discussion on the Superbowl, Armstrong Williams, Steven Phenix’s call for PR people to stand up and be counted and an interview with Noah Acres.

 

 Phil Gomes has a very interesting post on why he’s not prepared to defend PR – because it doesn’t need it…

“So, I’m answering this blogosphere-wide question by not answering it: I have absolutely nothing to apologize for, or defend, by working in public relations. There is a very high probability that you don’t either. Is PR “necessary?” Well, I have a role in business and the mediasphere and I do my best within that role. Like I said earlier, on most days I even enjoy it. That’s good enough for me. I have engaged in my profession honestly, holding the needs of my clients and a resolute respect for the mediasphere in the absolute highest regard. Likely, so have you.”

 

 Personally I never know how to handle these things on this blog, but I think it’s worth noting that David Parmet, a PR practitioner, contributor to Gaping Void and someone who often adds a lot of value by way of comments to my regular ramblings has been let go. If anyone needs some PR brain power they should look his direction. Proof that every cloud has a silver lining, David plans to kick off a specific PR-Marketing blog in the near future.

“I�ve been in and out of the PR agency world since 1997. I�ve seen the boom, the bust and the alleged recovery. I�ve worked with some folks who �get it� and some who think that controlling the message is what we are supposed to do…. There�s a lot of fear in the air. The agencies fear the clients, the media and the real possibility of missing the Next Big Thing�.”