Day: January 21, 2007

Reviewing my last post, I realized a couple of things.

Firstly, I’m too grumpy and secondly, I’ve been writing about these issues for too long and so sometimes I assume that you, my most gentle of readers, have been with me every step of the way.

Untrue.

So let me add some additional context.

While reading the post, you may, if you didn’t know me better, assume that I am something of a King Canute character, slowly getting wetter as the waves of the “InterWeb Revolution” wash away my analogue existence.

That would be incorrect.

I believe that the new generation of online services, which have been building momentum since the dot com bubble burst, are having and will have a major impact on how we live, work and communicate – that’s everyone, not just the PRs.

However, I am also pragmatic. I question this move to an idealistic world where everything will be online and where we should listen attentively and heed the views of the visionaries that have been appointed by the digerati.

I question those who believe that all corporations are evil and PR people live to confuse and misinform.

I question those who lecture us without the wit to realize they’re talking about things they know nothing about – but by dropping the words “social media” they are suddenly world experts.

All of a sudden the term “audience” is to be banned.  Instead everyone is an induhvidual.

All I ask is that we question the vision of the unproven visionaries.

Change is inevitable for every living organism from an ant to a corporate PR professional.  Long-term success, whether we’re talking about simple survival or a successful career, requires us to adapt to changing conditions.

Yes, we will use the online media more – whether we actually know we’re doing it or not – yes, it will have a major impact, and yes, this means the practice of Public Relations will require review and refinement.

But no one has all the answers, and more importantly no one has opinions more valid or more valuable than yours, particularly when they are talking about your profession, which they clearly know nothing about – well beyond the usual sterotypes.

You turn your RSS reader off for a day and all hell breaks loose.

What’s it this time you might ask? Well now it’s the social press release… well no it’s not actually the social press release.  It looks like it’s the social press release but when you scratch a little, pull back the band-aid then it’s more a (nother) swipe at the PR dweebs.

I’ll try and explain.

Stowe Boyd kicks things off with a post following a Third Thursday event in San Francisco.  He criticizes the idea of a social media press release asking why PRs won’t just use blogs, he believes that we (that’s all us PR twits) are misusing the term social media.  We shouldn’t use the term “audience”.. there’s more, read it, I’m bored already. [Robert then weighs in with his broad PR expertise].

You guys, you make me laugh.

[There’s a wide range of discussion: Brian Solis, Mike Manuel, Chris Heuer, Shel Holtz, Stuart Bruce ]

I don’t intend to undertake a long, detailed and insightful defence of the social media press release because 1) I’d be too bored to hit the post button and 2) The guys above do a fine job of addressing Stowe’s issue.

Stowe underscores his deep understanding of the issue and his position as a balanced observer of the “new new” media with his follow up post:

“Social Media and Public Relations: The Press Release is Dead”

Fantastic stuff, straight from page two (or should that be permalink two) of the “new new” media online wiki (handbook is soooo Web 1.0) and I quote:

Everything that we know from before is dead.  This should be the first line of offence and defence against Neanderthals, who dare to question your opinions or even try and suggest that some off-line things may not actually be swept away by the all knowing, all seeing, all transforming power of the InterWeb.

Whatever. 

I think I’ll sit this dance out and spend the time thinking about all the AUDIENCES I’m going to fax this week. 

Really and truly.  Is there room for more than one ego in those Web 2.0 bubbles?

Excuse the (very un-Web 2.0) religous reference, but is the use of the term “audience” really a sin? Is it a cardinal sin or just a venial sin?

We should all heed the knowledge of the blogger who invokes that most powerful of all Web 2.0 commands: “Kill the press release.  We don’t need the press release anymore, just put it on a blog.”

Yes, I’ll go and tell the NYSE right now sir.

I don’t know how many times I’ve invoked this quote, but given I’m breaking all the Web 2.0 rules, I’ll break another and I’ll even modernize it:

It’s better to not type something, format it, hit “publish” and appear ill-informed than to hit publish and remove all doubt.

Web 1.0 rocks.

Anyway to cheer you up check out this video via Serge.

This [via Darren] made me smile: