If what you say is true, what will be the public portal role in this case? Portals like Yahoo, MSN, AOL.

Are public Portals still in play to help each and every web surfer navigate this enormous space of conversation and content?

Thanks for your thoughts.

Regards,
-Sudd.

Sudd,

Interesting indeed and something I have to think about. We are now talking to reporters at Yahoo News I guess I consider these portals as bridges to new media, but they are making news judgments now on front page etc.

Richard

What you say makes sense to me.

However, let's say some forward thinking company hires your agency to join the conversation on their behalf, to search for and respond to comments made about their products and shape the debate(s) in their favor.

Perhaps you assign a team of talented and professional researchers and writers to the account. Would they be anonymous fronts or would their links bring them back to Edelman PR? Or to the company who hired you?

It seems to me that the temptation is pretty strong to invent profiles of what the PR agency thinks represent 'cool' bloggers and watch them for a while as they put them out, keeping those profiles that seem to work in the high-ranked blogs, dumping those that don't; in effect, attempting to manipulate the debate, running the risk of being exposed for having a hidden and vested commercial interest and thus, zero credibility, which of course could cause the spin to backfire.

How would your firm handle it?

Richard: I think that your comments and observations are "bang on". New technologies, inclusing blogging, "push content" etc. are quickly evolving and changing the communications business forever - both how to do it and what the receiver is expecting.
I also note with interest the CSR practice within your company and looking at your findings in that context, wonder if you agree with the comments made by the CEO from Shell when he said, "In short, it is time to pull sustainability reporting out of the hands of PR departments and align them more closely with Annual Reports." It would appear that no one trusts PR or traditional media anymore and a new media model is required to get CSR Sustainability messages through to stakeholders.
In case you have not read it, I would highly recommend a book by Don Tapscott called "The Naked Corporation". In it, he describes the impact that technology has had/is having on corporations and outlines what is needed - openness, honesty and transparency.

Bob J

Richard

Please forgive me, but I get confused by the loose usage of the word conversation. It seems like this post was more like a broadcast of your very fine thoughts, rather then a conversation.

Is it possible that selling the mostly-broadcast medium of blogging as a conversation will backfire on reporters who are really looking for the face-to-face or phone-to-phone contact that everybody recognizes as a true conversation.

Mike,

Fairly said. Conversation is continuing dialogue among multiple parties on line I guess it can also be construed as an interview format for reporter with subject. But that is not what I meant.

Richard

Bob,

I am depressed by the idea that PR departments will lose CSR reports to annual reports done by the financial department. PR is the ideal means of building bridges to multiple stakeholders, particularly civil society. If finance takes it over, then it will mean simply reporting on quantitative outcomes such as less fossil fuel used in operations. CSR can and should be much more I will pick up Tapscott's book and thanks for writing.

Richard

Noel,

We want transparency from the very beginning, so our rules for engagement are as follows, "Hi I am from PR firm Edelman I represent this cool client. Here is what I know and what I need to find out for you. I promise I will continue our discussions as soon as I can. I want your feedback so you can help my client do a better job on product or service."

That is the standard we are holding our people to.

Richard

Richard,

I can't honestly say that I consider that much of an answer to my very direct question. At least, I can't honestly say it's an answer I believe.

It is one thing to say you want transparency and another thing to be transparent.

Both of us know that anyone entering a blog using that text would be ignored because their commercial interest would be obvious, but I thank you for giving me this preposterous answer because now I know for sure how you would not handle it!

Regards,

Noel

Noel,

I disagree. Why does identifying yourself as being from PR company automatically disqualify you from having a voice? If we don't identify ourselves and our client, then we don't deserve to be in the dialogue.

We will be found out, we will be dissed on line and rendered useless.

Richard

Richard

Thanks for the response. Although it may seem nitpicking to define what constitutes a conversation, a dialog or a broadcast, it would seem that knowing the real strengths and weaknesses of various communication modes is important.

Although blogging is closer to dialog then say - newspapers with letters to the editor, it is still a broadcast to most of the readers with -just dash of back and forth for those who bother to comment or email.

I think writers may feel that blogging is dialog or conversation, because it is a bit more interactive than what they have experienced in the past and the tone is often conversational.

Richard,

Frankly, this talk of "the blog world is ours -- tread lightly" is so much self-important tech-hipster hogwash. The tone of such pronouncements sounds very familiar. These are the same types of statements made in the mid-90s by those who said the World Wide Web itself would always be fundamentally "hip," "nonhierarchical" and "un-commercial" -- and today, 10 years later, is it any of those things? Guess what: once everybody and their Aunt Edna start doing something, it's no longer hip. And I think I hear Aunt Edna signing up on blogger.com as we speak. Blogging changes things, but that doesn't mean that the larger (read: corporate) world will bow at the feet of blogging's early adopters. The larger world will absorb blogging, not the other way around.

Scott

Scott,

Just take it all in. PR business does best when it listens well. We also have to hold ourselves to higher standard of conversation, not pitching.

Richard

Richard,

I agree with your sentiments. Thanks for your e-mail.

Scott

Mike,

You are right. This is not simply a conversation between two people. It is as if you and I are having a conversation but doing so with huge megaphone. Then anybody around can join in.
So not really between actually among, right?

Richard

In regards to the conversation topic, I consider blogs more like moderated discussion groups than broadcasts or one-to-one conversations. A blogger puts out a point, then those of us interested in the topic keep the discussion going. A great example of this is Bruce Schneier’s blog (http://www.schneier.com/blog/), which has such a following in the security industry that he can practically throw out an idea, then sit back and watch as his readers debate.

By their very nature blogs target just the few people interested in the subject, whether that's an audience of 15 or 15,000. From a PR perspective, it's not so much about PR people seeding the blogs with comments or even starting them, but working with anyone involved with a company (employees, partners, customers, etc) to help evangelize ideas and concepts.

Staying with Bruce Schneier’s blog for a moment, if a company dealing in IT security wanted to bring to light new and innovative approaches to a problem, anyone working for or with that organization can just become part of the conversation. It does, however, have to be genuine, as the other readers will rip apart any “pretender.”

Chuck,

Good point. Here is key transition for PR people. Move from setting up interviews for media with our clients to being well enough informed to carry on conversations on behalf of clients with bloggers. This will take training but we should aspire to it. And get clients to buy in.

Richard

Richard,

Thanks for your note.

I'm finding that the client buy-in is the biggest problem. My attempts, so far, to get my clients to dive into discussions has met with a bit of resistance. A few have started blogging, but even that isn't being embraced as I would have hoped.

PR people are communicators. Getting them to communicate more directly shouldn't be a major hardship, though it will require a clients to trust us a bit more.

This isn't the end of the change either. Barriers to content distribution are dropping, leaving us direct access to our targets. The question will be: where do tasks like media relations fit in?

Best,
Chuck

Chuck,

Good point. Here is key transition for PR people. Move from setting up interviews for media with our clients to being well enough informed to carry on conversations on behalf of clients with bloggers. This will take training but we should aspire to it. And get clients to buy in.

Richard

Richard,
I noted with interest your comments about blogs. I wanted to share with you a recent survey I gave to my community of moms (over 50,000). I asked them if they wanted me to begin a blog and if they read and enjoyed blogs. I was surprised with the response. Over 3,000 moms responded and their overwhelming feelings about blogs...they don't like them.

MOMS HATE TO SLOG THROUGH BLOGS

They are overwhelmed with the amount of content to deal with on a daily basis and one more data point left unattended drives them wild. Comments such as:

"I have enough to think about on my own...I don't need daily reminders of other's views."

and

"NO BLOGS....give me action ideas once a month in a newsletter you deliver not something each day I have to check out...ugh"

So, for the mom market...blogs are not the thing!

All best,
Mimi Doe

Soulful Marketing to Moms