Accidentally on Purpose Blog

The Mercury News had a great post about the growing number of fake CEO blogs — fake Steve Jobs, fake Steve Ballmer, fake Larry Ellison just to name just a few.  Fake blogs yes; but, the entertainment is real enough.  The persona of these blogs are like characters in a TV sitcom.  Wouldn’t that be rich — a sitcom based on the CEO’s of the tech sector.

Fake Steve Ballmer: “CEO and general Manager at the worlds most powerful and pervasive company, a mover and shaker with world changing influence and charisma. Don’t freaking cross me!”

Fake Larry Ellison: “The more I win, the more I want to win. And I will win, okay?  Trust me.”

Fake Steve Jobs:  “I love beautiful objects. I love creating them. Negative people upset me.”

For me, what’s most interesting about this trend (if you could call it that) is how it might play in the context of an ongoing debate:  should CEO’s blog?  Many social-media savvy folks believe they should not.  Too easy to get into trouble, too boring if they protect themselves against potential trouble topics.  

Perhaps theses fake blogs are filling a void?  Since Jonathan Schwartz has both – you decided.  Which is more interesting, fake Jonathan Schwartz, or the real Jonathan Schwartz?   

In the Technology section of Sunday’s, NYT’s; , there was an interesting article about corporations gaming Wikipedia, Seeing Corporate Fingerprints in Wikipedia Edits.  The impetus for the article is the launch of a neat little service  called Wikiscanner that “cross-references an edited entry on Wikipedia with the owner of the computer network where the change originated, using the IP address of the editor’s network.” 

The reaction to Wikiscanner? 

The conversation this weekend seemed to follow two threads of logic:

–the service exposes flaws in Wikipedia (bad Wikipedia, bad!)

–the service exposes the corporate “PR” gaming that’s going on behind the scenes (bad PR people, bad!)

From my perspective, Wikiscanner looks like a good thing.  Shining a bit more light on what businesses are doing is a good thing — for both Wikipedia and the business people who take care to make their movements in Wikipedia transparent.  

I think I liked David Churbuck’s post the best! 

You gotta applaud Google for its recent decision to allow people to comment on news stories in which they are featured.  Reminds me of the March 2007 post by journalist/blogger Tom Foremski, in which he argues that “the right to respond”  should be a rule of engagement on the Internet.  

“Publishing  a response to a critic is not enough because it is unlikely to be ranked on the first page of search results. Similarly, if a critic were to change their mind about a company, an individual,  or product–the search engines could still be serving up the original complaint on that crucial first page of results.  This is a serious problem in terms of reputation management for companies, and it will increasingly affect individuals too as they seek new jobs, new partners, etc.”

I agree with Tom, and in the age of conversation, it seems odd — if not unfair — that the subject of a news story cannot directly comment on or refute the story.  But while this may be a big step for Google, it’s a relatively small step for Internet journalism.  Until news organizations uniformly begin to allow comments, the “Right to Respond” will remain elusive.

The Facebook phenomenon continues to get tons of coverage.  This article in the Journal really made me smile.  It’s about how uncomfortable things can get when your boss or other folks you are “close to” ask to be your “friend.”  

I’ve been on Facebook for about a month now.  I don’t have any potentially career limiting images posted, not yet anyway.  But, as the article describes it seems that a lot of people do.   I haven’t been asked by my boss to become his “friend” — yet —  but, I do have a number of colleagues that have asked. 

the lighter side:

–utilities like Facebook can enable you to quickly connect and communicate with a broad spectrum of people in a more intimate and perhaps efficient way

–various networks and groups can help you organize information in a more fun and perhaps more useful way

–increasingly, FB is becoming a standard for commercial interaction, easing the way for people to invite others into their networks

the darker side:

–do you really want your boss looking at that photo of you from that New Years Eve party?

–do you really want to see that photo of your boss on the beach?

–sticky networks can be an incredible drain on your time

Technorati Tags: Facebook

By now all the commentary (here, here and elsewhere) has died down on Google blogger Lauren Turner’s post.   This incident underscores the importance of social-media training for people in your organization.   I’d like to use this as an opportunity to discuss how you may want – rather need — to help your business with some social-media training.  Much as you would train anyone speaking on behalf of your company, two of the more overarching lessons would be:

• if you are writing on a corporate blog, people will naturally assume you are writing on behalf of the company.
• if you are writing on a personal blog, people may still make the assumption that you are writing on behalf of the company. 

Whether or not you like it, people may see you as a spokesperson for the company, and you need to weigh the responsibilities and outcomes of what you post before you publish.

One of the issues facing the corporate adoption of Social Media is the “what to do” factor.   I’m asked all the time; what should I do about this or that?  So, now I’m developing a social-media “training” curriculum.  Basically, it’s about preparing those who are unaware of how to engage. 

This “training” isn’t about how to blog, it is about helping people understand the likes of: 

• what to do when the New York Times calls you for comment about what you just posted on your blog?
• someone just commented about your product and they got it all wrong — how do I respond? 
• what are the potential risks of engagement?
• someone just wrote a highly critical post about my product, and it’s all true — how do I respond?
• what are the potential rewards of engagement?
• what’s the difference between the print media, online, blogs and social networks?
• etc.

This is a work in progress.  I’d very much like to hear your thoughts/experiences/recommendations.  Remember, the goal here is to educate those that don’t yet understand the nuances so that they too can participate effectively.

I feel somewhat compelled to address the iPhone; everyone else has by now.  But since I don’t plan to own one, at least not in the immediate future, I’ll limit my contribution to the frenzy with an observation of the launch.

By strategically limiting early access – to the device and the story — Apple is really expanding its ability to provide wider access.  Some people may not agree with the approach, but for Apple it seems to work.  Ah, the brilliance of a Steve Jobs-driven “PR” campaign.

For example,

• Making the devices available on a Friday evening to create a shopping frenzy before the weekend.
• Putting the devices in the hands of a select group of influencers.  Those influencers ignited the blogosphere and traditional media outlets this past week.
• Today’s “town hall meeting” at Apple. The ultimate insider’s event — who wouldn’t want to be there?
• And despite the high price, limiting sales to only two per customer. 

Here’s a great post from Marc Andreesen (Co-founder and CTO, Ning Inc. ) who writes about how to hire the best people.  I think Mark’s post is spot on.  Hiring good people is no accident, sure it can happen that way (hell, that’s part of the premise behind the name of this blog) but if you really want to surround yourself with the “best” people you will have to work at it. 

When it comes to hiring “PR” people. Like Marc, I too look for Drive, Curiosity and Ethics but that’s just the ante.  I’m also looking for those that want to change the rules of the game.  I’m looking for conversationalists, those with broad business experience and able to participate in this more confrontational style of conversation.

What does all that mean?  I want to do my part to help the PR profession with it’s “PR” problem!  PR isn’t just traditional media relations.   Its a lot more than that.  True PR or ”Public Relations” is IMO the domain of everyone in your organization.  Now, that doesn’t mean that everyone gets to speak to the WSJ but it does mean that in the real world people speak with one another.   How you engage with other people; customers, partners, vendors, competitors, even your neighbors — matters!  It determines how others feel about you and the organization you represent.  This is PR.  Remember, its always about the people first!

I wanted to take a moment to introduce you (for those who aren’t familiar) to the Society for New Communications Research (SNCR) or \snik-ers\ as its more commonly referred to. The SNCR is a global think tank dedicated to the advanced study of new communications tools, technologies and emerging modes of communication, and their effects on traditional media, professional communications, business, culture and society.

Its Fellows include more than 40 futurists, scholars, business leaders, communicators, members of the media and technologists from around the globe, all of whom collaborate to explore issues surrounding the evolution of communications and media.

They are dedicated to creating a bridge between the academic theory and the pragmatic implementation of new media and communications tools & technologies and social media methodologies.

They also have a Vendor Council with representatives from more than a dozen leading technology companies.  At this time SAP is not a member — perhaps I can change that next week when I will have the opportunity to meet Jen McClure, the executive director of the society while I’m in Palo Alto. SAP is hosting the Social Media Club’s Silicon Valley Workshop: Starting the Conversation on June 11th.  The SNCR is a co-sponsor of that event.

To provide you a sense for some of the work SNCR’s has conducted:

• Research Committee: The State of the Art in Social Media
• Research & Best Practices Committee: Corporate Blogging Policies – Best Practices
• Research & Best Practices Committee: The Emergence of Blogging in University Admissions and Recruiting (in conjunction with Georgetown University)
• New Communications Law Committee: Podcasts: Download or Broadcast – Legal Implications

And some of the research that is currently underway:

• Working with Marketwire, one of its Vendor Council members on a  research project exploring how bloggers’ source and use news items.
• Corporate Blogging Best Practices
• The Customer as Co-author & Co-creator of a Brand.

They also publish a blog and monthly enewsletter called the New Communications Review and the bi-annual Journal of New Communications Research. The Spring / Summer 2007 issue will be available in a couple of weeks, and will include a broad range of topics:

• The effects of social media on the profession of public relations.
• The impact of the Internet on social capital in America.
• An examination of the healthcare blogosphere.
• and more…

Oh, and one of the more interesting elements of the journal is that it is accompanied by a wiki that provides for ongoing collaboration and updates between the society and it’s members.

If you are interested in further developing your communications knowledge/experience or your looking embark on the social media path (personally or professionally) you should really have a closer look at the Society for New Communications Research. You too may find that “SNiCkeRs” really does satisfy!

Technorati tags: Society for New Communications Research, Communications, PR, Social Media, Social Media Club

Did you see Joseph Thornley’s post about Mike Arrington’s talk at the Mesh conference?  Now, before we get too far off the mark, I’m only addressing Joe’s first item, the one regarding Mike’s statement about being first to post.  I got to thinking about that comment and how that very notion seems to be so pervasive these days.  While speed may be important, I happen to believe accuracy is of greater importance. 

It’s understandable that Mike wants to be the first to write on a hot story as it still “pays” to be first.  But IMO, getting the story right is far more important. Too often, people jump on a story without really thinking about it simply because they too feel it’s more important to be first. 

This is the principle that drives lots of reporting.  As PR professionals, you understand this and you have learned to manage the need to be first by either giving exclusives (where that makes sense) or by asking folks to honor embargoes (so that everyone can be “first”).

With the advent of social media, now everyone wants to be first.  The result?  Too many people wind up getting the story wrong — or incomplete — in their rush to be first or among the first to write.

What’s interesting is that the now-universal need to be first seems to be forcing some to rethink that strategy.  As one of my close PR colleagues recently acknowledged, it seems like there are a number of bloggers and reporters who are now willing to wait for a story to break BEFORE posting themselves.  Why?  The nature of news distribution has changed.   As anyone who has watched a story wax and wane on the Internet knows, it is sometimes the follow-on story — with deeper perspective, and well to be quite candid, the facts and some analysis — that gets the lion’s share of attention.  And sometimes the big follow-on story becomes the final word if not the first word about a story.

Of course, in the blogosphere there is no “last” word.  But the lesson here for bloggers and journalists alike is that in a world where being first often means being wrong, it sometimes pays to be “last”.

,

Chinese, is already the third largest slice of the blogosphere language pie (8%), as reported by Technorati’s most recent State of the Blogosphere report.  Japanese #1 (37%) and English #2 (36%) are by far the largest languages of the live web. 

Acknowledging the growth potential in China, Intel Capital announced and as covered by InformationWeek, that it’s investing in 51.com, China’s largest social network.  The network already has 60 million users, and is adding five million users a month (a month!). 

While this story received light press coverage, I would hazard a guess that we will be hearing a lot more about 51.com in coming years.  In fact, Reuters wrote yesterday that 51.com is already looking at a possible IPO in three years and is targeting a NASDAQ listing.  

With roughly 20% of the world’s population speaking some form of Chinese; as more people in China network online, the conversation, regardless of the topic, is only going to grow. 

Did anyone see where I put my Rosetta Stone Mandarin CDs?