Category Archive

Read an interesting post by my fellow Canadian at Buzz Canuck that does a good job of capturing the paradox that as online blog quantity grows blog quality appears to be going downhill. It does seem increasingly difficult to find good blogs that contribute original, insightful commentary rather than diatribes or just a digest from the usual aggregators. But another point that hit home for me, as a blogger, is the ongoing challenge to keep posts current, relevant and fresh. Like many others, I’ve cut down on the number of posts I write but strive to pack more punch (nutrition?) when I do post. That’s not always easy. I have as much trouble as anybody finding the time to write, let alone the content. And I probably don’t do a good enough job of engaging in conversations with fellow bloggers (commenting on their sites) rather than just using their posts as thought starters. But despite the warts, the blogosphere remains a vital part of my personal and professional development. The greatest value for me is that it forces me to listen, learn and think.

My former colleague and fellow Canadian Joe Thornley shared his “do’s and don’ts” for corporate blogs in a recent post, and they provide a very good checklist for any potential company bloggers out there. Since my focus these days in on internal communications, I reviewed the list with an employee audience in mind and - no real surprise - many of the rules still apply. Take a look.

 Do’s 

Listen first -Probably the most relevant tip with regard to internal corporate blogs. Unfortunately, I see a real tendency to want to harness this new channel to push yet more messages to employees. This is the area I will be focusing my efforts in my own company before single post is written. I also intend to increase the ways we can actually “listen” to the workforce beyond rare, formal surveys and polls. Or else, we’re talking to ourselves.

Write about things you are passionate about -Again, this is not the first instinct of many executives when they begin to write for an internal blog. The default is usually to write about corporate news or priorities, and you’re lucky if the folks writing feel strongly about these fairly prosaic issues. It’s also a tough sell to convince executives (or internal experts) to inject their personality into their posts, not just their expertise.

Give without asking for a return -See above…not a normal reaction for executives steeped in discussions of ROI and driving engagement. The challenge is to convince them these things will come, but if and only if they provide something of value to employees through the blog and folks decide to join the conversation. It’s also important to note that a blog will quickly uncover anything that is not genuine or authentic, so any concern for the employee had better be real.

Keep it positive - This may be easier to do in an internal context. In fact, the challenge may be reversed in a corporate setting, working to avoid sugar-coating problems or dancing around unpleasant facts through corporate hype or fluff. There may already be too much positive communication in most corporate settings - and some of it is likely somewhat fabricated or embellished.

Be patient and persistent - No argument here. It takes time to build an audience, to find a voice and to foster a real, vibrant conversation. This holds true for an internal blog even though in theory the employees are a ”captive” audience. Provide relevant and valuable information and allow robust, candid commentary…and they will come.

Dont’s 

Don’t use a ghostwriter -I am a strong advocate that internal authors should essentially write their own posts - even the CEO. Though it’s OK in some circumstances to help them out or do some light editing, they should provide most of the copy in their own voice. Without authenticity, the impact of the blog will be severely limited. This is a tough one for many executives used to plenty of hand-holding and direction in the development of their speeches and memos.

Don’t fake it -I make the case with my peers that to be credible an internal blog must be timely, transparent and candid. As Joe notes, blog readers can be ruthless and unforgiving at the mere hint of a cover-up or lie. Though the criticisms may not be as overt in an internal blog, lack of credibility will quickly corrode the relevance of the blog.

Don’t give up -May not be as relevant for an internal blog, but valuable advice nevertheless. This is not a short-term process with immediate rewards. Like many good things in life, it takes time to develop a good internal blog. After all, this is about building new relationships across levels, locations and communities. That’s not something that can happen overnight - particularly in companies without a tradition of internal conversation.

This postby Steve Rubel on the proliferation of SEO consultants with dubious tactics (and intentions) is just the latest cry of alarm about this ugly trend. It should be no surprise, of course, that some will promote/sell ways to jack the system to make organizations (or individuals) look better in search results - either by burying negative on-line mentions, generating a lot of fluff and/or driving the popularity of positive mentions. There is certainly merit in proactively trying to get positive corporate or personal content near the top of the ladder - in fact more companies should be doing this as per of their ongoing PR efforts - but problems occur when this is the only purpose of the SEO efforts. And there is a difference between adjusting copy in a press release to get the right words (or tags) featured in a search and generating empty content or fake traffic just to alter the search returns. As Rubel suggests, SEO rankings should be a by-product of engaging in on-line conversation, not an end in itself.  Hopefully PR and marketing professionals just becoming familiar with social media will steer clear of the snake oil salesmen and focus on doing the right thing - driving credible and transparent conversations.  

This recent post by Steve Rubel is just the latest account of the blurring of traditional lines between advertising agencies, consulting firms, PR agencies, design shops and virtually any other organization involved in digital media and content. Steve’s post suggests we may have put the old media companies out to pasture too soon, since according to Booz Allen they are gradually beginning to offer some of the services and talents traditionally offered by ad agencies - such as media buying and even “idea generation”…what George Bush might call strategery. Witness another example in my own little world from the past week. Part of my new gig is rebuilding my company’s intranet, so I’m looking for everything from strategic counsel to design help and social media expertise (we’ll be including a blog and collaboration tools.) Where to go for help? Well, it could include one or all of the following: big PR agency, intranet design firm, local production house, social media boutique in a PR agency, local ad agency, event marketing agency, big HR consulting firm, small IT consulting firm, internal communications agency…and assorted freelancers and one-trick ponies. Everybody is encroaching into everybody’s else turf. Of course, not all of these attempts at diversification are credible or robust, but they definitely define a real trend. So… who will I get help from? I’m still not sure, but one thing I’ve learned is that people who have real chops in social media are few and far between, so in that case I’ll go to the team I used in a previous life that has actually built blogs and gone through the online wars. In this fast moving world, there is still no substitute for expertise and experience.

Picked up a post on Mashable that nicely captures choices for the key web trends for the past year. The only big one I would add - though it might seem like stating the obvious - is the increasingly dominant role of Google as an economic, cultural and technological force on the Web. For better or worse, what they decide to do (or buy) has major ripple effects on the vast internet ecosystem. Though some fear this power, I’ve yet to see any negative impact of Google’s domination in my daily interactions on the Web - quite the opposite, in fact - so I’m withholding  my judgement.

Looking beyond the core Web trends into related developments in PR, I guess the most prominent trend is simply that companies are slowly, sometimes reluctantly, adopting some of the tools and ethos of social media in their communication activities: corporate blogs, internal wikis, RSS-enabled intranet portals, islands on Second Life, crowd-sourcing sites, social press releases, Twitter networks…and so on. There’s also been a steady increase of activities that could be considered marketing - or sorry…relationship building as the CMOs would define it. 

I see most if not all of these trends are positive developments. The twin disciplines of PR and marketing (as well as advertising to a lesser extent) have already greatly benefited, I would suggest, from being blown inside-out with the liberating gusts of Web 2.0 ideas and tools. PR, in particular, was (is?) in need of a major overhaul; name another profession with such a dubious reputation, stifling inertia, propensity to flirt with the dark side of ethics and insular thinking. Let the winds of freedom blow…. 

Had a great discussion at work last week about emerging best practices in PR - with a focus on companies that are doing innovative things in the area of social media to drive their marketing efforts. At the top of the list was Nokia. An increasing number of companies (including mine) are using fully-loaded social media news releases - complete with links, bookmarks, tags and options for feedback and questions - but Nokia is leading the way in terms of outreach to influential bloggers. As detailed in this good summary post, Nokia is supporting product launches with targeted outreach to dozens of influential bloggers. Here is a post by Steve Rubel on the program. Not only do they send the bloggers the trial product in advance of launch - in this case the new N90 video phones - but they also set up a dedicated website where the bloggers can access additional information and materials, share comments with peers and engage in dialogue (online or off) with Nokia product reps. Beyond the dialogue on the Nokia blog, of course, these VIP bloggers posted comments on their own blogs. (One was so positive it was misidentified by BusinessWeek as a sponsored corporate blog.) Along the same lines, Nokia also recently launched a moblog (for mobile blogging) inviting users of the new NSeries phone to download their videos.

Consider this an evolved version of the traditional distribution of product samples for beat writers. But beyond using bloggers rather than journalists, the process has the added aspect of conversation and is inherently transparent - beefs and warts are there for all to see and discuss. It’s a courageous approach that is a big step in the right direction. As my good buddy Paul Walker from GCI says, however, Nokia still has room for improvement. Though Nokia seems to have mastered these social product launches, they still need work in fostering a more sustained conversation with consumers - not just the VIP bloggers - beyond the big launches.  Still, some good lessons there for the PR and marketing troops.

My fellow Canadian at Canuckflack recently had a post about the Foreign Office in the UK government opening its doors - quite wide - to external blogging. I’d also read recently that some enlightened departments in the Canadian government were also blogging. And I’m sure there are more in other parts of the world. I give these guys kudos, but I wonder what this says about corporations that are afraid to dip their toe into the big conversation. If a government department can do it - those bastions of bureaucracy, secrecy and caution - why not companies? For the UK blog it appears the format will allow a wide range of people to blog - not just a moderator or restricted group. I think this approach makes sense, with the following caveats:

• Anybody who blogs should be trained to understand the rules of engagement, legal tripwires, web etiquette, etc.
• Folks should be selected on the potential value they can provide to readers, not just their personal desire to be famous (or semi-famous?) The modus operandi where I work is to focus on SMEs - or subject matter experts - who can provide insights and information that will be relevant to the blog community or specific categories.
• Participants should be committed to posting on a regular basis, and also reviewing comments on their blog posts and beyond. There is no greater sin for a blogger than not be listening to the conversation and being irrelevant.
• Participants should be themselves and post in an informal, candid and conversational tone. Keep it short and relevant. Easy to say…but apparently for some harder to do.
• Think multi-media - a blog can feature photos, video and podcasts.

In most if not all of the conversations I’ve had or heard about digital media lately, a topic that invariably comes up is who “owns” it in organizations. Or more pointedly, who manages and coordinates the digital programs, who creates the content, who manages the blogs…and who should drive the digital strategy. This prosaic topic may appear trivial, but as any consultant worth his/her salt will tell you process and organization is critical to turning an idea into reality. From what I’ve seen and read, digital media efforts are led by a wide range of usual suspects in major companies - marketing, advertising, corporate communications, IT and sometimes even branding. And this is no surprise, since the elements of Web 2.0 technology cut across all of these departments - relevant to all, but owned by none. The problem with this lack of obvious ownership is that it seriously inhibits coordination and focus - and ultimately effectiveness.

No matter where the digital apostles work in a company or who is the most learned expert or where the blog moderators reside, it’s critical that companies begin to create new structures and processes to help make sense of the Web and drive coherent, integrated programs. It’s also essential to find and leverage the wide range of skills and expertise that are required to design and execute a strong Web 2.0 strategy - including serious technology chops, editorial talent, video production, project management, advertising experience, research, marketing, website design, etc. The list is long. Getting organized can be as easy as forming cross-functional teams that incorporate members from all relevant teams. And it likely means creating  some new senior roles so leaders can direct and track the efforts. Without this grunt work, companies may be relegated to one-off efforts that are often disparate and even contradictory. None of this means organizations need to create a new bureaucracy or be paralyzed by analysis - since glacial consensus-seeking and rigid regulation is anathema to Web 2.0 tactics. Think of it more as providing a basic sense of direction and order…Web-style.  

This week USA Today had a cover story on the striking lack of civility and vitriolic commentaries that populate the Web. This is not a new story, but it gained well-deserved attention when Kathy Sierra shut down her blog (and speaking engagements) in the face of anonymous threats and vicious insults on her popular blog. The issue has also gained prominence due to angst about the prevalence of sexual predators on social networks like MySpace. I think the debate is good because it forces all of us on the Web to help define a collective code of conduct. What are the rules of the Web, if any? For what it’s worth, here is my take on this issue:

- I love the free-wheeling atmosphere of the Web, but that doesn’t mean anything goes. Just like in real world conversation, pointless insults or more dangerous threats and attacks should be prevented or removed. Most online users seem to agree that reasonable rules of conduct do not infringe on healthy debate and don’t constitute unnecessary censorship.

- Anonymous comments should be banned altogether. Most of the nonsense on the Net is left by anonymous users - it’s far too easy to write senseless online rants when you don’t share your identity and can’t be tracked. Also, not attributing comments  goes against at least two of the central tenets of internet etiquette, namely transparency and attribution.

- Websites and bloggers should be able to define whatever rules they want for their sites - as many have - without incurring shrill cries of censorship. That said, they should also make those rules very clear to users and make every effort to consider the views and preferences of their users (or community) when drafting those rules. If users don’t like the rules, they don’t have to visit the site. That’s called freedom of choice.

The USA Today suggests that the level of bile on the Web can partly be attributed to the increasing lack of civility in Western society, along with the fact that it’s just so damn easy to leave rude comments on the internet. These may be accurate assumptions, but either way I still have faith that the collective wisdom of the “crowd” on the internet will help define reasonable norms that most users will follow and promote. To me the issue is not just freedom of speech - which despite some limits seems alive and well on the internet - but that the parameters of freedom are largely being defined by the global online community.

Neville Hobson has a post that provides a good summary of the evolving methodology for measuring the influence of individuals online. This is a critical issue for public relations practioners and marketers trying to identify and reach those oft-mentioned “influentials.” Seems like the methodology is becoming more sophisticated and going beyond the Technorati/Alexa rankings (which are watched obsessively by some) and raw traffic and subscriber numbers. Edelman has developed a new social media index that captures social networks like Twitter, Linked-In and Facebook and measures the number of friends and updates, among other items, to generate the index. At first glance, I’m nervous about counting “friends” in networks since that gauge is more a reflection of popularity than influence and is highly vulnerable to abuse, but I applaud Edelman for its efforts in this area. And like Neville, I agree with the premise that any true measure of influence has to go beyond blogs to include the social network platforms.

News that Whole Foods CEO John Mackey posted comments under a pseudonym for years on a Yahoo chat - a story initially uncovered by the Wall Street Journal - has sparked some good discussion in the blogosphere and traditional media. The latter have focused mostly on whether Mackey broke any SEC or confidentiality regulations, and the consensus is he did not. But beyond that legal issue there is no question Mackey broke the informal rules of the blogosphere that promote transparency and attribution. Mackey and his PR team have used tortuous logic to try and explain why his posts (including some where he hyped the stock and positioned himself as a fan of the CEO…or himself!) were totally above board and a way to engage in candid conversation. This is a surprising and disappointing turn of events for one of the more progressive and candid CEOs in the country. Though there is no clear rulebook for the Web, Mackey clearly broke one of the most sacrosanct laws of etiquette - be honest about who you are and what you do. File under “Web 2.0 Scandals” beside the Wal-Mart travelling fan imbroglio.

Prominent blogger Jeff Jarvis has a comprehensive post that nicely summarizes the latest online polemic about the evolving rules of the game for bloggers. This particular discussion was sparked by a recent Microsoft campaign that featured personal comments (plugs?) by some high-profile bloggers in banner ads which appeared on their sites. The key issue, cogently detailed by Jarvis, is whether these bloggers should have accepted to be directly involved in the ads and whether they are being transparent with their readers about their involvement in the campaign (the bloggers are apparently getting paid on the basis of page views for the banners.) There are two fascinating aspects to this case. One is the wide-ranging and robust discussion on the topic, which illustrates the “self regulating” tendencies of the Web and the moderating power of the diverse online community. Somehow, norms and informal rules are proposed, refined and publicized - though it’s often a rather messy and tumultuous process. Such is the price for virtual democracy. The other is the focus on integrity of the bloggers. To Jarvis and many others, the “old school” values of editorial integrity and transparency remain paramount on the Web, even as the lines between marketing, news and entertainment blur. It will be interesting to watch how this issue fares as the Web continues to grow and evolve. 

Prominent PR blogger Shel Holtz recently posted a lengthy treatise on the etiquette related to ghost-blogging. Shel makes a compelling argument that ghost-blogging, under most circumstances, is not acceptable - particulary when it involves CEOs or other executives who purportedly are sharing their personal views with readers. I agree with his premise - a blog is not a speech or publication, which few would expect or think are written exclusively by the CEO. A blog, particularly with a featured author, presents itself as a personal diary of sorts and by implication must be written mostly or totally by the featured author. (I say mostly because there is latitude, I believe, for minor refinements and edits as long as the basic material came from the author.) What this debate shows is that some folks are still using the rules of traditional marketing and PR in an environment where transparency and honesty are paramount. It’s a brave new world out there, and though the Web 2.0 ”rules” are sometimes diffuse and difficult to confirm, it’s pretty clear most online users don’t want to be misled.

Shel Holtz has an interesting post on his blog that details a recent dialogue on GM’s Fastlane blog. In it, CEO Bob Lutz explains why he’s been relatively quiet in recent days (or weeks?) and refutes various claims about GM’s purported lack of commitment to the blog. Lutz should get kudos for addressing the criticisms head-on and being candid and real - two critical requirements to be credible as a blogger. This debate reminds me that the best advice I ever heard on etiquette for blogging is that you should treat it as a friendly dinner conversation. That means being direct and honest, but never rude or defensive. It also means being responsive to the discussion and answering questions directed at you - to avoid those would be totally ridiculous and disingenuous in a dinner setting, and they are equally so online.

I attended a great communications conference last week - one which thankfully featured more senior practitioners than the usual consultants hacking their magic bullets - and I was struck by the wide range of understanding and involvement in digital media tools. Some folks still seemed very hesitant to develop corporate/CEO blogs - and were trying to run their analysis through traditional risk-reward paradigm - while others were intent on catching the wave. The discussion was catalyzed when Bill Jensen, who leads an eponymous consulting group, laid out the fundamental shifts in how information is shared online, particularly by the Gen Y cohort. In short, anyone who believes we still control the flow of relevant information - or that we should - is missing the boat. Clearly, some in the audience were not willing to let go of the old model and embrace this scary new environment populated with citizen journalists, vibrant social networks and self-appointed blog pundits. This was particularly true of those involved in internal/employee communications. I suspect this will change in the coming months. Though caution and deliberation is certainly warranted before making the digital leap - it’s better to figure out why and how you will engage in Web 2.0 technology than just jumping in - PR professionals will quickly lose relevance and credibility if they don’t become fluent in this new environment. By the way - I take no personal credit for being knee-deep in this brave new world; I have the good fortune to be working with very smart, creative people who are willing to take risks and understand the huge potential of the web.

Cheers