« August 2005 | Main | October 2005 »
September 30, 2005
Poland Getting to the Next Level
I went to Warsaw this week to visit our new office. I was met at the reception area by thirteen enthusiastic employees holding up letters that spelled WELCOME. In a larger sense that is exactly what Poland is trying to say to the world.
As I arrived, the Poles had just concluded their fifth election since throwing off the Soviet yoke in 1989. In fact the spiritual heirs to Lech Walesa, hero of the Gdansk strike and first president, were the winning parties. This constituted a move back to the center right for the electorate, a rejection of the former Communists who had been in power for a decade. The turnout was an all time low--barely over 40% of the voters cast ballots--a reflection of disgust with government, embroiled in controversy over corruption, unable to address key issues such as infrastructure.
We had prepared a survey of 61 business journalists from seven countries on their attitudes towards Poland. We found that Poland was identified with traditional industries such as agriculture and manufacturing, with no recognition of excellence in knowledge industries such as technology. Poland ranked third behind China and India as a country with bright prospects, though most reporters had little knowledge of the country's economic policies or important companies. You must understand the Polish mentality to appreciate the true challenge of competing for foreign investment against such powerhouses as China, India and lesser lights such as Mexico and Russia. One of the Polish journalists I met suggested that she had been taught to sit in the corner doing her work well until recognized by the teacher.
Poles recognize the benefit of having global visionaries such as the late Pope John Paul or Lech Walesa. A Polish businesswoman gave me a very meaningful recasting of the old Polish joke of how many Poles does it take to change a light bulb--one to hold the bulb and four to turn the table. She said, "How many Poles does it take to change the world? One. Lech Walesa." They know they need to have successors for these global leaders, so that Poland has a position at the opinion shaper forums.
There is an overwhelming stamp of the past on the city, which was largely destroyed in 1944 when the Warsaw citizens rose against their occupiers. The Umschlagplatz, or "delivery station" memorial stands at the edge of the now destroyed ghetto to remember the 300,000 Jews who went on to the death camps from this train depot. The huge Stalin era Russian style office building, replete with steeple, is the highest point in central Warsaw. I met with the chief rabbi of Poland, Michael Schudrich, who commutes between New York City and Warsaw. He told me there are approximately 5,000 Jews remaining in the country (there were 3.5 million pre-war), mostly in Warsaw but that he hopes to find more who may have converted to Catholicism in order to save themselves. He conducts daily services in the single remaining temple in Warsaw, with the enthusiastic support of the government. `
The Poles feel that they are part of Europe but want to be seen as having an independent voice on international affairs. There is some resentment about the "Polish plumber" imagery used by French opponents of the EU Constitution during last summer's referendum in France. In fact, a clever Pole put up a billboard of a very handsome Polish plumber who said that he would rather stay at home (except if he could be cast as guest star in Desperate Housewives--the American women would like this fellow!) There is ambivalence about Poland's contribution of troops to the war in Iraq--some concern about possible terrorist retribution, a sense that Poland has gotten little in return from the US Government. But there is pride in having been asked to help and being able to afford to do so, a sense of mission in assisting others to escape tyranny.
In a long dinner discussion with my new colleagues in Poland, I learned that they work long hours, watch little television (no time), are on line mostly at the office (little broadband to home), go to college for three years, often return to their parents' homes until they get married, do intend to be married but to have relatively small families, and expect things to get better in the next few years. They are also incredibly resourceful. One of our account executives working on the Cialis brand for Lilly, found out that a photo was needed for a Sunday feature story. He stripped to the waist, had his fellow AE shoot him bare-chested with a box of Cialis, and emailed the photo to the editor within five minutes. So the legend of Dominic, the spiritual heir to Austin Powers, is born.
I have the sense that Poland has the same determination to succeed that was evident in Ireland in the late 80s. Its educated work force and central location make this a definite star for the future.
Posted by Edelman at 6:00 PM
Comments
Post a comment
September 23, 2005
Blog Study is Now Live
The Technorati and Edelman blog survey, which I blogged about on September 12, 2005, is now live at www.bloggerstudy.com.
I encourage all bloggers to participate.
Have a great weekend.
Posted by Edelman at 4:57 PM
Comments
I don't know how you advertising people sleep at night. Seriously, truth is simply a maleable concept-- to be shaped into that which brings you and your clients the most money.
Thanks to ad agencies, we no longer know where art ends and commerce begins. The news is now just one long advertisemen too. Selling messages to the highest bidder.
So some of us have found shelter from your endless crap on the blogosphere. Yet, lured by your insatiable desire to make more fucking money, it seems you will come to the bloggers to find more novel ways to repackage your clients' crap.
Stay away, and tell your brethren to stay away too. We don't want your crap in the blogosphere. For pete's sake, it's everywhere else. Most notably, in the White House.
Posted by: The Bulldog Manifesto at September 24, 2005 1:19 PM
Richard
I actually believe the Edelman rhetoric around the relationship imperative.
I just don't think you're following through your own logic. There are 30 million bloggers out there, of whom you are one. How would you react to it?
Not well, I think.
Believing in the relationship imperative, surely means moving away from a pure advocacy model, to one where PR people are facilitators of conversations and mutual understanding between stakeholder groups.
They need to persuade, not dictate. Good PR people become trusted sources for media, and experts in their own right, not just spokespeople for single causes.
The adversarial relationship that exists between corporations and individuals needs defusing.
And the blogosphere is a great place to do it. But not if we carry the 'story-pitching' 'key messages' and 'sell-in' media baggage.
Engaging the blogosphere has a lot more in common with public affairs and CSR, than media relations. I wish the survey reflected that more closely.
Posted by: TimK at September 24, 2005 2:49 PM
TimK,
You are right. We need to move beyond a pitching mentality. When we publish our recommendations post this study this will be at top of list. Thanks for writing
Posted by: Richard Edelman at September 26, 2005 11:40 AM
Post a comment
September 22, 2005
Implications of Reputation--How Intangibles Drive Performance and Strategic Advantage
I attended the Arthur Page Society annual meeting this week. The Society is comprised of the top communications executives at Fortune 500 companies plus a few PR agency CEOs. The session was held at an opportune moment, just after the devastation of Hurricane Katrina, the sentencing of Messrs. Kozlowski and Swartz of Tyco (former CEO and CFO), and the bankruptcy filings of Delta and Northwest Airlines.
Here are some of the highlights:
1) Stakeholder versus shareholder model--Dave D'Alessandro, former CEO of John Hancock and now part owner of the Boston Red Sox, made a strong case for the multiple stakeholder approach. He used the recent sale of his insurance company to a Canadian giant, Manulife as an example. He was able to get a guarantee of fixed employment and commitment to the present charitable contribution levels for four years as part of the deal. "Though it might have cost a buck or two in the purchase price per share, it was well worth it," he said, "in reassuring our employees and the Boston community. He contrasted this to Gillette, which simply sought the highest price in selling to Procter & Gamble. The ensuing criticism of Gillette CEO Jim Kilts in the local media and by local politicians was the logical outcome, D'Alessandro believes.
2) Frat House Rules--Geoff Colvin, senior editor of Fortune Magazine, said that the business community is now being seen as an unruly fraternity on campus, with attendant suspicion of every action. Companies face the possibility of a rapid fall from grace. Note that the Fortune Most Admired List saw IBM drop from #1 position for four years in a row to #357 in a single year. Or that others on the Most Admired List in recent memory include Merck, Coca Cola and the now merged Rubbermaid. The audience was clearly stunned when Colvin advised CEOs to keep a low profile, to let the company's deeds do the talking. Colvin also contended that a company's reputation is largely driven by share price and financial performance, because "it casts a glow on everything else. CSR is important, but two rungs below," he said.
3) Content versus Context--Fred Crawford, a management consultant, suggested that context is even more important than content for brands. He added that "trust is a substitute for perfect knowledge and the time to act on it. Trust leads to preference leads to seeking leads to purchase." As technological differences among brands become less perceptible and brand cycles shorter, companies need to work on other aspects of the purchase experience, including service, access and company reputation.
4) The Skeptical Employee--Gary Grates of GM described his company's efforts to control health care costs by securing the cooperation of the United Auto Workers. The engagement with the employees was done at multiple levels, including an advertising campaign showing GM workers at the factories (the new look of GM), creation of a Healthcare 101 brochure for workers done with the UAW and allowing employees a voice in GM's charitable activities. "A company needs a collective cause and must be emotionally driven as well as rationally driven," he said. Joan Wainwright of Merck noted that in the period up to and following the adverse VIOXX court decision, the employees moved from shock to frustration and anger to questioning the company's behavior to concern about survival of the enterprise. She learned that the employee force must be the first to know and be armed with detailed information in order "to keep them focused in a tempest and despite a tendency to go quiet during litigation."
5) PR at the Top Table--It became clear that the top PR executives in companies are at the top table in times of crisis. Ken Sternad of UPS, an Edelman client, told a group of us at breakfast about his department's role in helping tell the story of the Gulf Coast getting back to normal, with drivers making the first deliveries of supplies to local businesses trying to restart operations. The remit of the PR executive is also expanded by using the blogosphere. Grates said that GM announced the $19,000 price of its new Solstice brand on the Fast Lane blog of Bob Lutz, chief design officer, and that the management committee regularly writes posts back to Lutz on quality issues.
A few concluding thoughts from your host. In an increasingly skeptical world, what matters is deeds and words. To suggest that actions alone will be sufficient without setting proper context and a means of constant reinforcement of message is impossible. To go to the other extreme, all image without substance, will not succeed. We should recognize the potential of building reputational capital based on good works and great performance for the inevitable crises to come.
Posted by Edelman at 9:25 AM
Comments
Richard: I totally agree with the comments in your concluding thoughts. Having worked in corporations for over 30 years, many businesses are doing many good things to help multiple stakeholders. For some reason, corporations are afraid to tell their stories and in spite of the good deeds being done, no one knows about them, ROI is not maximized and reputations suffer. Colvin's comment is perhaps driven by the fact that traditional media do not and will not tell the "good news stories". Two editors of major international print media have been quoted as saying, "Our role is that of a watch dog. We are running businesses with limited resources. Where do I maximize my impact - telling good news stories or uncovering things that are not right and reporting these so they don't happen again?" The answer is obvious. They went on to say, "We leave others to report the good news stories." With Colvin's comment, the group is now three. If the corporation does not communicate regularly, not much wonder people are skeptical about a sporatic communication. Do the deeds but tell someone about them! That way, as Stephen Covey says,"You have a substantial balance in their emotional bank account and when the inevitable crisis happens, there is something there to withdraw".
Posted by: Bob Johnson at September 27, 2005 6:48 PM
One idea to consider. Use employee bloggers to tell the story. This has worked for us on WalMart relief effort on Hurricane Katrina. Note that old media followed on blogs. Thanks for reading my blog
Posted by: Richard Edelman at September 28, 2005 11:00 AM
Post a comment
September 12, 2005
The Farmer and the Cowman Should Be Friends
One of the songs in the musical OKLAHOMA (I know I am showing my age) starts with Aunt Eller Murphy, doyenne of the community, grabbing a farmer and a cowboy who are insulting each other. She tells them to get along for the good of all, leading to a square dance in which cowboys dance with the farmers' daughters and vice versa.
I feel the same way about bloggers and PR people (BTW, I'm both: http://www.edelman.com/speak_up/blog). Whether citizen journalist, simple story-teller, local experts, public diarists, gossip or wise-cracker, most bloggers are truth seekers and disseminators of information. PR folks worth their salt are also keenly interested in the honest communication of ideas and information on behalf of their clients.
Companies are waking up to the harsh reality that they cannot control their communications to multiple stakeholders. A company just has to take a look at the blogoshere to see that its customers are now clearly and firmly in charge of the conversation. So, companies need to establish relationships, based on mutual respect, continuous dialogue and transparency. PR people are an important bridge to between companies, media and customers. We embrace the new world of immediacy, credibility and horizontal peer-to-peer communications.
I saddens me to see postings like the one by Jeremy Zawodny (http://jeremy.zawodny.com/blog/archives/004930.html) in which he suggests a blanket ban on emails from tech PR firms. I realize this might be a natural reaction to the surfeit of emails sent out by my PR colleagues who believe that bloggers are just like journalists who will simply bin any unwanted materials. In fact this "cover the waterfront" approach (or No Media Left Behind) is infuriating because it takes up time and competes for bloggers' attention.
But there is a bigger issue at hand. Many bloggers do not trust PR people because they believe we are spinners who are being paid to obfuscate or cover up. This trust gap can only be overcome by transparency on purpose and funding source, and by PR people being willing to acknowledge client shortcomings as well as promoting the attributes in continuing conversations instead of packaged press releases.
Edelman is trying to find useful and transparent ways for PR people to engage with the blogosphere on behalf of its clients. We believe that you are the voice of the consumers in co-creation of products, the spirit of the employees who seek a role in the betterment of their companies, the citizen journalists who break news about the products they use (as well as on more important topics, as shown in the horrifying and sad events of the past couple of weeks.)
That is why Edelman and Technorati are cooperating on a survey of bloggers to be emailed out at the end of next week. We are going to ask bloggers how we can get the relationship right, how PR companies can help them rather than annoy them, how we can improve the conversation, how we can earn their trust. We will post the findings on the Edelman Web site on October 6 and to email results to all those who participated in the survey. We will also share the data with those in the PR business. Our goal is simple--we want to create a best practice approach that will help the cowman and the farmer to be friends.
I would appreciate your feedback on this approach, hopefully before Friday. I will post the proposed questionnaire tomorrow. What would you do differently? I am all ears (literally according to my kids) :).
Posted by Edelman at 11:54 AM
Comments
It's also about good, targeted pitches. If you remember the Russell Beattie SNAFU, what happened was a PR blogger sent him a pitch that wasn't a fit for his blog, and then when Beattie replied/responded for more information, he got no response.
It's things like that that hurt PR. The so-called New PR should take a page from Old PR and learn about your target, and respond. It's really as simple as that sometimes.
In a proposal and pitch, I noted to the potential client that blogs are important, but it's more important to actually target the right blogs and bloggers.
And, transparency. That's another hot topic that I can go on about for hours... but too many bloggers aren't transparent enough about their relationships and clients.
Posted by: Jeremy Pepper at September 14, 2005 2:21 PM
Jeremy I think we will need to move beyond pitching To listening and relationships We cannot assume bloggers are like reporters who will toss extraneous pitches
Anyway we are all pushing this revolution thanks for writing
Posted by: Richard Edelman at September 15, 2005 12:12 PM
Regarding Jeremy's Pitch and Propsal idea, isn't the Blogosphere more about conversation than one-way communication? How can this conversation be refelected with PR practitioners without it being considered an "interview" or citing the pratitioner as a spokesperson?
These ideas are definately something that are new to me and I am interested in how the community works them out.
Posted by: Robert Taylor at September 17, 2005 7:13 AM
Richard
It strikes me that pure objectivity is the highest hurdle for PR people to overcome. As soon as a pr person or company becomes professionally connected with a project, they become partisan. Of course, they can add value to an initiative by, inter-alia, reflecting consumer/public concerns and opinion but once a fee is involved, the ability of the pr person to be objective and open about acknowledging issues is fatally compromised. So the gap is one of credibility and I'm looking forward to seeing your research design to see how you can tease that out. Peter
Posted by: Peter Robbins at September 21, 2005 7:24 AM
Robert - blogs are a conversation, but just like at a cocktail party, you have to realize who you are talking to, and if they even care. Why would I start talking about baby products to an engineer with no kids and no interest? I wouldn't - but you will see tech blogs pitched on baby products because of a slight tech tie-in.
As for being cited as the lead, that's up to each blogger. When I am pitched for my blog on a story, I don't necessarily say "I was pitched this" or "I went out and requested this interview" - does it really add to the conversation?
Posted by: Jeremy Pepper at September 21, 2005 11:36 AM
JP the usual strong commentary
Our Technorati survey goes out end of this week
Thanks for your support on the blog
We need to know
Posted by: Richard Edelman at September 22, 2005 3:58 PM
Peter,
I think PR folks cannot be objective--they can and should be client advocates Having said that, we should aim for journalist level quality in our content We should use third parties with true expertise as our reference points We should also offer opportunities for co-creation--that is consumer feedback on a given proposition, with the client learning from the commentary Note that GM management actually reads posts from the Fast Lane blog on quality issues Thanks for writing
Posted by: Richard Edelman at September 23, 2005 9:07 AM
Richard,
You mentioned "We should also offer opportunities for co-creation--that is consumer feedback on a given proposition, with the client learning from the commentary Note that GM management actually reads posts from the Fast Lane blog on quality issues," in your discussion with Peter.
I think that blogs really are an opportunity for companies to build better products. In some ways I think that blogging will really put the marketing concept into effect for many companies in the same way that paid search marketing has for ROI marketing.
Though I think that companies have to be prepared for the reaction to using blogs. I've chatted with a few GM customers and they were not happy with GM's lack of response to their comment posts.
I think you are right on the nail with this survey. Thanks
John
Posted by: john cass at October 13, 2005 4:43 PM
John
Interesting that GM PR guy Gary Grates told me that GM exec committee looks at feedback from Fast Lane on product quality and service
This is the opportunity for companies to allow consumers an early view of product then show responsiveness to feedback A giant focus group but one with real clout!
Thanks for reading my blog
Posted by: Richard Edelman at October 14, 2005 11:13 AM
Post a comment
September 2, 2005
Katrina, London Bombing and Tsunami--This Round To the Old Media
I did not sleep very well last night. I was haunted by the faces of the victims of Hurricane Katrina, which slammed into the US Gulf Coast on Sunday. I kept seeing an African American woman holding two babies, screaming into the camera, "Help us, we are dying." The images on television and major web sites (cnn.com) convey a strong impression of a city (New Orleans) utterly in chaos, with looters carrying off stolen merchandise from smashed store windows and self-appointed vigilantes enforcing their own version of justice with personal firearms. As the NY Times reports this morning, "the scenes on television looked as if they could have been filmed in a former Soviet republic or Haiti." Or as NBC's Martin Savidge said, "This is not Iraq or Somalia. This is home."
One stunning admission last night came from the director of the US Federal Emergency Management Administration, when he acknowledged that the Federal Government "had no idea" that 20,000 people were stranded at the New Orleans Superdome without water, food or even working toilets. How is it possible in this day of advanced communications in the wealthiest nation in the world that we can condemn our fellow citizens to such a squalid existence?
There is no co-creation of the narrative as in London or during the tsunami, where the best content came from participants in the unfolding tragedy. Why? Because the tourists at Phuket were armed with digital video recording devices that could capture the oncoming wave and resulting devastation while the victims of the subway bombing who could snap photos on their cell phones.
Web devotees will point to statistics such as Technorati reporting that seven of the top ten search terms on Tuesday were hurricane-related. Or they will cite Wikipedia, the user generated encyclopedia, as being the authoritative source on the latest developments. But as BBC News reports, "It was not a news story entirely dominated by citizen-led news and images as the London terrorist attacks had been."
The fact is that we are now seeing the tangible evidence of the digital divide. The poor do not have the means to communicate their situation. You can bet that if David Weinberger or another star blogger were trapped in the Superdome, he or she would have been posting continuously until relief arrived. And those posts would have reached to the highest levels of the media on the very first day of the crisis.
The lack of peer-to-peer information sharing from the victims of this tragedy to the outside world, has eliminated a great source of pressure on the federal government that only such horizontal communications can foster. Instead of a flurry of first hand accounts the coverage has relied on the old paradigm of traditional media going down to Louisiana and Mississippi cover the story.
The US Government's efforts to communicate during the past four days have been quite ineffective. I have been following the Whitehouse.gov web site, which posts both print and digitized video of statements from President Bush, Department of Homeland Security czar Chertoff and Press Secretary McClellan. I also looked at the web site of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), whose director Michael Brown has been on site directing the relief efforts. The White House site has the feel of a corporation in crisis, where the CEO has not been to disaster site and where the emphasis is on statistics (# of ready to eat meals delivered) and show (Clinton and Bush I surround President Bush as in tsunami). The FEMA site has no visuals of Brown in action, nor any of his compatriots. Coverage has devolved to the Governor of Louisiana and to the Mayor of New Orleans. A key lesson for me--show us what the mid-level US Government employees of such agencies as FEMA or the Centers for Disease Control are doing to improve the situation. Post statistics on charts with goals and achievement of target to date.
Enough of the detached commentary on this tragedy. Here is one small contribution to the people of the Gulf Coast. Edelman will match dollar for dollar any money donated to the United Way by its employees. United Way is taking donations by check made out to United Way of America with Hurricane Katrina Fund in the memo line, sent to United Way of America, PO Box 630568 Baltimore, MD 21263-0568 or via credit card by calling 18002724630. I will be the first to participate by mailing a check this morning for $1000.
A final personal note on this September morning. I am now celebrating my first anniversary of blogging. I have enjoyed it thoroughly. Highlights of my year include my commentary on Armstrong Williams, my blogs on my trips to China, India, London, Greece and Turkey, the journey of personal discovery whereby I discovered the Russian heritage of my father's family through the good offices of the Hamburg Emigration Museum and my new friendships with my second family in the blog community--Weinberger, Tenowitz, Rose, Jay Rosen, Linda Stone et.al.who are now constant companions.
Posted by Edelman at 8:55 AM
Comments
As always, it is a treat to read your commentary on the world. (Although treat might be the wrong word, since it is such a major disaster you are writing about.)
As I have read the reports and watched the news, what surprised me was my lack of shock. A friend who spent a semester, fall 2000, in New Orleans came back and said that everyone lived knowing the big one would come and destroy the city. It was an accepted part of living in New Orleans and I've had that in the back of my head ever since.
Also, sadly, I'm not shocked by the looting, slow reactions by government, and general depression. Instead I feel like I am watching the final chapters of Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged walk out of the book and into the five o'clock news. Or the mob scenes from the latest version of War of the Worlds.
After watching that movie with friends, one commented, "That's not how people act in a disaster. People come together, they aren't torn apart." That was based on her experiences in the Israeli Defense Force. I agreed with her, "People do come together, look at September 11, look at the tsunami." But maybe people only come together when they are totally blindsided--not when there has been a failure to organize or prepare.
Those are some of the things I am wrestling with as I keep reading the news. Thanks for matching our contributions to the United Way. I hope many companies follow your lead.
Posted by: Leah at September 2, 2005 12:05 PM
Hi Rich,
Great point about the digital divide. But the question is, what do we do about it? The divide is in just about every city, from Boston to New York to Detroit to LA. How do we fix it so when something else happens we're prepared?
Even better, I'm fascinated with the idea of blogs as sources of extremely localized information. Many news organizations are too broadly focused to cover the smaller community issues. This is a perfect spot for bloggers to step in (in places like http://www.h2otown.info/ in Watertown, Mass. they have) and create online meeting places for neighborhoods. If that existed in New Orleans, people would know where to go to find information about their homes.
I've actually been amazed at how MUCH information manages to get out, even as power and phone lines are down. Ernie the Attorney managed to update his blog by sending SMS messages to a friend who then posted. This even as phone and Internet service were down.
Posted by: Chuck Tanowitz at September 2, 2005 4:22 PM
I've been reading and listening to all the complaints and accusations about our government and especially from the Mayor of New Orleans. I put most of the blame on the Mayor and Governor of the state. They had at least 3 days warning that a category 5 hurricane was going to hit the city and all they did was announce that the people shoudl evacuate then they left. Why didn't they contact surrounding states and the federal government asking for school buses, city buses any type of transportation and evacuate those that didn't have the means on their own. The Mayor bashes our government but he knows best the means of his people so why didn't he ask for help prior to the disaster? Why didn't he mandate evacuation out of the city rather than to a stadium that can barely handle a sports crowd let alone thousands of refugees? Why didn't the mayor contact the governor days in advance and prepare appropriately instead of waiting for the disaster then accusing the United States government of racial actions and lack of response. The mayor should take blame for his lack of response and advance planning. He knew the levies were only built to handle category 3 storms. They saved 8 billion dollars by not preparing the levies for a category 4 or 5 storm, now what's it costing? Mayor Nagin is the main source of blame not the American government and not the American people.
Posted by: Mike at September 5, 2005 11:05 PM
Mike
One thing is sure
We need to evaluate our communications infrastructure in light of New Orleans disaster There must be a better way How was it possible that FEMA boss did not know that 20,000 people were in horrible straits in Superdome?
Thanks for writing
Posted by: Richard Edelman at September 6, 2005 9:13 AM
CT thanks as always for writing back
In the future perhaps bloggers can be mobilized as crisis communicators
You are right about potential neighborhood by neighborhood I like it
Posted by: Richard Edelman at September 6, 2005 9:15 AM
Leah,
I am so pleased by the reaction to the United Way match Our people are very united in this effort We will find a charity that needs our help on PR side too!
Thanks for writing
Posted by: Richard Edelman at September 6, 2005 9:16 AM
Hello, Chuck; Hello Richard --
Richard, good on you for donating $1000. At H2otown I am running a matching drive for evacuees who have been taken in by the community of Lake Providence, Louisiana. We've named Lake Providence the "sister city" of the H2otown online community, so now I also post news updates to H2otown readers about what's going on with their brothers & sisters there.
As far as neighborhood communication goes, I'm not sure we're there yet in terms of using local news weblogs as a source of information in disaster preparedness situations. For instance, how would I update the site, and how would people read it? One thing that might keep it going is that many local residents have accounts and can post to the site, so there isn't a single point of failure. Our server is thousands of miles away in a datacenter, so flooding my basement wouldn't take the site down.
I think in the future one thing that will (probably inadvertently) help with information dissemination in emergencies is better net access on cell phones, and better support in content management systems (including blogs) for outputting cellphone-friendly versions of the content (plaintext, no pictures, etc).
I suspect Mike, like so many people, has made up his mind. It worries me that so many people in America seem to have a mindset where facts or new information don't make a dent. That's a problem in disaster preparedness, too: If people don't let information in, how are you going to give them instructions they need to survive? See Laurie Garrett on this topic.
This "facts bounce off" scenario as Americans become more cynical about government, companies, and each other, is also a looming problem for PR, What happens when people won't take in new information anymore? Harry Frankfurt's little book is highly instructive on how we got to this point.
Posted by: Lisa Williams at September 7, 2005 10:52 AM
Lisa,
One idea
Every city ought to have a dark site ready for such a disaster One place where all media, residents and businesses can go for official information We developed this for the Mayor's office in NYC post 9/11 check out LowerManhattan.info
Posted by: Richard Edelman at September 7, 2005 5:15 PM
JG so inspirational so moving
my heart and head are with you
Posted by: Richard Edelman at September 14, 2005 12:12 PM