Category: General

A former colleague of mine, Andy West, has a new venture underway at Friction.TV. It’s an interesting idea, it’s a portal for user generated videos where you upload a video of your opinion on a particular matter, for example politics, business sport etc. Then you can tag your contribution so you build up a range of opinions in common areas.

I think it’s an interesting concept as there’s nothing more enjoyable than conflicting opinions!

From a UK perspective there’s a range of content already up there, it’s definitely worth a look, they even have a contribution for Boris Johnson! That’ll keep Stuart happy!

It’s just begging for a passionate defence of the press release. Any takers?

Update:

The “World’s Leading” offer their own inimitable take…

Before I begin this post let me provide clear guidance on my position.

Firstly, I am a passionate advocate of blogging and the rest of the online tools.  I firmly believe that these technologies will have a major and profound impact on how we communicate – albeit these technologies may not ultimately look like they do today.

Secondly, I am by nature skeptical of surveys.  I think they provide interesting insight but you can always question their validity.

After many failed attempts I finally got around to reading Edelman’s 2007 Trust Barometer report. [Thanks to Piaras who sent it on]. It’s an interesting read – particular the growing importance of the environment.  The report only samples 35-64 year old high income earners – which means it potentially misses the more tech-savvy segment – and the sample of 3,100 is too small to be definitive, but it is interesting.

We listen to the digerati telling us how blogs are sweeping the online nation, how PR is dead and the press release is “deader” – and how we can’t use the word audience anymore because we’re all people.  Yet the report finds that bloggers rank below PR people in terms of credibility and influence (CEOs are rated #1 followed by Industry/Financial Analyst and a “person like you”).

In terms of credible information, analyst reports, business magazines, conversations with peers, TV coverage, newspaper coverage and press releases lead the way. Blogs again are at the foot of the table.

Of course it could be argued – quite successfully – that “conversations” are what Web 2.0 is about. And maybe in the future online conversations will make up a greater proportion of it…

But while Web 2.0 will continue to grow in influence and reach, when you step out of the cloud, the reality is that life today still remains far more analogue than the ivory tower types would have you believe.

So, just to confirm, newspapers, radio and TV will be with us for a few more weeks. In the meantime blogs, podcasts, social networking and IM will continue to grow.

PS:

I was giving a talk yesterday to a group of local practitioners on technology and new media.  It’s a talk I’ve been giving for about five years now, and the change has been profound.  While in the past participants wanted to talk about e-mail usage, web site design and the odd request about blogging.  The group yesterday was unanimous on the need to address blogging (and other Web 2.0 areas).  So the word is getting out there and I’m delighted to report there was a lot of fantastic discussion on the topic.

PPS:

If you haven’t already read Edelman’s 2007 Trust Barometer I recommend it.

It looks like Dilbert is following PR Watch’s lead on the dark and mysterious world of Public Relations…

Like a big overgrown baby that’s how.

Man, if only my professional life was as exciting and dynamic as this video suggests [Via Philip].

Now don’t get me wrong, there’s a lot of unethical practices such as astroturfing going on out there.

But I think I’m safe suggesting that the vast majority of PR is about helping companies and individuals communicate more effectively with their audiences (shock! the web 2.0 crowd won’t be happy with that).

The vast majority of us don’t spend our time having fantastically covert briefings in darkened car parks.  The vast majority of us have ethics, families, friends and lives.

PR Watch absolutely performs a useful watchdog service, but by tarring everyone in PR with the same brush they are only fulfilling their own worse nightmare. It’s FUD – that’s all.

Whenever I hear people ranting about PR people’s dark mission, I always wonder should I view my family like the poor henchman’s widow in the Austin Power’s movie who gets that call that her husband has been killed. And while he’s clearly evil his family are normal and clean living. Nah.  My conscience is clear baby!

Shel’s post brought a smile to my face.

At a recent get together in Atlanta, Robert French commented to Shel:

..that he wished those who enthuse over blogs as a replacement for traditional channels of communication (i.e., press releases) would study the issue before talking as though they have been practitioners for years. He is not telling anybody to shut up; he only wishes they would gather some facts before making unreasonable recommendations.

Amen to that. Read Shel’s post for more common sense.

Sometimes when you get too close to the hyperbole around Web 2.0 you start to believe the hype or worse accept the hype as reality.

The exciting thing about Web 2.0 isn’t the zealots preaching from their lofty perches.

The exciting thing about Web 2.0 isn’t the death of off-line, traditional or other things.

No.

The exciting thing about Web 2.0 is that people can come together online with a host of new channels, tools and technologies and do amazing things.

The exciting thing about Web 2.0 is incredibly intelligent people collaborating and sharing.

This video from Michael Wesch, Assistant Professor of Cultural Anthropology at Kansas State University is a nice reminder of what this is REALLY about. [via Philip]

Don’t let the zealots wear you down. We’ll all still just normal people.

A couple of people have commented to me over the past few days that my posting recently has been, how do I say this, grumpy?

A cursory browse down this page does present evidence to support this assertion. But then my blogging style has always been grumpy 🙂

If anything is likely to set me off on a rant, it’s one of the ‘blue sky’ crowd going on about the subject of PR without ever having licked postage stamps for press release envelopes – or the digital equivalent – it’s been a while since I was in an agency – maybe it’s assembling digital clippings?

Anyhow I digress. 

I’m delighted to report that today something from the slogosphere has put a smile on my face.

Anyone who has spent time on the agency side can remember clients who couldn’t understand why journalists wouldn’t be interested in widget X. This was the painful end of the job and required education and understanding.

I thought it was incredibly insightful to see this post [Hat tip to Stuart, Phil] from blog supremo Robert Scoble.

For those too lazy to click, (really brief summary) Robert bemoans the fact that people, sites, “publications” failed to link to a video he produced… which according to him:

But the news of my videos isn’t WHAT was discussed in them, but rather the TOUR itself. I expect at least a few of Engadget’s readers would love to see the place where the chips inside many of their gadgets are made and hear from the people who make those chips directly instead of reading just something that sounds like a press release rewrite. Maybe that’s just me?

Spot the uneducated client?

A man who feels completely qualified to comment on social media releases, doesn’t understand PR lesson 101 – that the value of “media” is not that they publish what you say is newsworthy – their value is that they provide editorial process on all the “news” that’s taking place – as a service to their readers.

Just because you think something you’ve done is cool or newsworthy doesn’t mean it is, or that I have to bother my backside linking to it for that matter*.

Maybe now Robert will realize that there’s more to PR than sending a press release. Maybe he’ll tell his friends, and maybe they’ll stop acting like bold children.

Robert here’s some free advice: go talk to one of those silly PR people and get some advice. If blogs have to link to other blog posts just because people ask, there ain’t no value.

It made me smile anyhow… so for that we’re all grateful.

*I obviously realize that it’s unlikely that Mr. Scoble or his peers would want a link for this blog, so I use this example only for the purposes of illustration.

As a follow on to my last post, here are a couple of examples of people thinking about integration rather than apocalypse when it comes to new and old media. 

This is where the interesting discussion is, not in statements with the words “old” “dead” Media” and “is”.

• Gary Goldhammer has a great post on the challenges facing the LA Times and how they’re planning to address the online, offline differences.

WHETHER THIS SHIFT WILL give reporters more job security and help bring The Times into the 21st Century is a question we will see answered in public – or as the tired cliché goes, in “real time” (as opposed to what, fake time?) We will see the triumphs and the failures, the true innovations and, I hope, the leadership I expect from a newspaper that needs to convince itself there are more days ahead than behind.

• Elsewhere Adrian Holovaty has a considered piece discussing how newspaper web sites need to change. [Via: Mr. Drumgoole]

 

• Finally Brian Solis offers a guide to writing a social media release.

 

Postscript:

The beauty of the online world is the ability to find information, and for information to find you.  Here’s a great thoughful piece on the future of newspapers from Jon Harmon – added to the blogroll.

Friends, readers, and PRs lend me your browsers.

I was recently reading my son the story “Chicken Licken”, I had forgotten that the ending is less fairy tale and more scary tale.

But there’s an interesting lesson.  Just because you believe something is true, it doesn’t automatically mean that it is, and you should be wary of the consequences of following that belief to the bitter end without taking a couple of breaths and looking around you.

There is a surfeit of Chicken Lickens all over the Internet. You can spot them quite easily.  They use words like “dead”, “doomed” and “stupid” quite a lot.  The real giveaway is when they use the phrase “they just don’t get it”. This particular doozy is normally invoked when someone doesn’t buy their rhetoric.

The other common trait among these little chicks is the liberal deployment of sweeping generalizations, as well as drawing questionable conclusions from a piece of evidence.

The latest brouhaha surrounded the social media release, this dragged up all the old Web 2.0’isms.. dead, death, PR people are stoopid etc.

Now Stowe Boyd has written a post entitled “Shel Holtz is the Perfect Example of PR Not Getting It”.  Which by simple extrapolation of course means that Mr. Boyd does “get it”.  He is a Web 2.0 visionary of course.

Shel Holtz is big enough and clever enough to fight his own corner.

But ladies and gentlemen, let me use Mr. Boyd’s post as an example of the hype and why you shouldn’t believe it.

Mr. Boyd has no understanding or experience of PR, but feels qualified to scold us all because we “don’t get it”. 

Let’s take one areas as an example.  He tells us that newspapers are “drastically diminshing”, indeed no other newspaper luminary than Warren Buffet has declared newspapers are dead….

Bit of hyperbole there Stowe? I’m sure from the top of the “always-on” ivory tower newspapers are not useful or relevant.  But here on planet earth newspapers are still incredibly important and influential.

Will there be changes in the newspaper business? Yes of course.  Will more people go online for news and opinion? Yes.  Will the newspaper business die in “Internet time”? Don’t be such a silly chicken. There will be re-adjustment, but it will be over time.

You see while you think PR people don’t “get it”, the real irony is that you don’t get it. You’re a little sore and confused because that acorn hit you so hard, but the reality is, the world continues.

We’re facing some exciting and interesting changes with the growing online world, with RSS, blogs, wikis, virtual worlds etc., but your belief that the revolution is coming, will only lead you into the fox’s den.  And there ain’t no way out of there, just ask Chicken Licken.

So let’s put the rattle back in the pram and have some interesting and insightful discussion on how we will see the merger of online and offline media, channels and tools and what this integrated world will mean for consumers. That’s the real piece of work that needs to happen.  Because that’s the real future.

There’s a lot of enthusiasm and passion around the wave of new online media tools.

The big question is: Do we know how these tools/channels will ultimately impact mainstream communication?

I believe the answer is not yet. 

I think that even though we’re seeing glimpses, we’re still some time from understanding the full impact of these technologies.  The emerging popularity of virtual worlds/Second Life technology is an example of how it’s continually developing and changing.

These technologies may utlimately look very different to how they look today.

One interesting step on the road to maturity is looking at the benefits they may offer organizations.  Steve Rubel has a post on a new methodology that has been created by Charlene Li at Forrester for measuring the return on investment from blogs. 

In Forrester’s interviews, the most frequently mentioned benefits of corporate blogging were: greater brand visibility in mainstream media on the Web, word of mouth, improved brand perception, instantaneous consumer feedback, increased sales efficiency and fewer “customer service-driven PR blowups.”

[Please note: Contrary to rumours around the InterWeb, I was not given an exclusive first, second or third look at the report].

You can read Charlene’s comments on the model here.

It’s good to see some analysis on blogging with respect to business.  It’s not a panacea but a good start.

 

Sidebar:

For obvious reasons I rarely discuss issues regarding my employer on this blog. I don’t intend to deviate from that policy.  However, I have found the discussion from Kami, Scott and Stuart incredibly interesting – this is an additional and often overlooked element of “Web 2.0” for PR professionals representing small, medium and large organizations. It’s another example that we’re not mainstream just yet.