Unjournalism

In an effort to clear up some of the many things I’ve intended to write about during the past couple of weeks, I’m going to fire off a quick run-down of links and my quick thoughts.

Hiccups girl
This poor girl can’t get rid of the hiccups (old news story, I know). She pops about 50 times a minute and has been doing so for the past month. Long story short: She was going to appear on the Today show, and the folks at Good Morning America just couldn’t stand to be beat on this hard news story (he said with loads of sarcasm). So they called the girl’s house 57 times, slipped notes notes under her NYC hotel-room door and otherwise tormented her and her family. My point: Isn’t this what journalists hate about PR folks?

72 percent of PR people: stupid or lazy?
“Preliminary results from a Kent State University/BurellesLuce survey shows that 72 percent of PR professionals do not have a formal system for monitoring the blogosphere. Only 19 percent say they do monitor blogs…” The survey was of “938 clients and prospects of BurrellesLuce, the media monitoring and analysis company.” Do these people know that Topix.net, Technorati and Google Blog Search are free? And that drunken monkeys could use them?

FakeYourSpace: If you want it, kill yourself
I’m not making this up. “FakeYourSpace is an exciting new service that enables normal everyday people like me and you to have Hot friends on popular social networking sites such as MySpace and FaceBook. Not only will you be able to see these Gorgeous friends on your friends list, but FakeYourSpace enables you to create customized messages and comments for our Models to leave you on your comment wall. FakeYourSpace makes it easy for any regular person to make it seem like they have a Model for a friend.”

“… Our basic plan starts at only $.99 This will give you 2 messages per week for 4 weeks. So for only $.99 you will receive 8 messages that will be there forever, not to mention our Models picture which will show up on your friends list. A pretty small price to pay for online popularity don’t you think?” This is the saddest thing I’ve ever seen. If this honestly appeals to you, you have two option: 1) please turn 14 years old — your birthday’s coming up, right? Or 2) shoot yourself in the mouth.

Greatest parody ever: Truth in Ad Sales
For anyone in advertising, marketing, PR — or anyone anywhere with any sense of humor — this is a must-see. It’s priceless. My favorite part: The exec who wakes up in the middle of the pitch meeting and tries to sound involved by stammering buzzwords: “Uh…mobile!…online!”

Newspaper scared of facts
The Raleigh News & Observer recently ran a description of rape suspect that included all sorts of details but omitted any mention of race. Isn’t that a little more significant than whether or not he was wearing a do-rag, which, mind you, is a little more removable than skin pigment? “I don’t think in this community the description of someone as black or white is as meaningful as it once was,” according to the paper’s managing editor. What other descriptive qualities are soon to become no longer “meaningful,” Mr. Editor? “The suspect is a person. In a do-rag. He or she committed a crime of an unspecified nature. If you see him or her, please let us know.”

A commentator from the Poynter Institute, a journalism think-tank-thingy, says: “All Irish-Americans don’t look alike. Why then, accept a description that says a suspect was African-American?” Well, for starters, some people will say “African-American” is a stupid phrase to use in many of the contexts in which it’s used these days; it’s lost any specific meaning. Second, if you have a problem with “African-American,” fine. Tell me the suspect’s skin is brown, tan, light brown, green, magenta, whatever. You’d tell me what color his hair and eyes are, right? What’s the difference?

Tags: blogging, journalism, monitoring, new media, parody, public relations by Mike Keliher
No Comments »

In the wake of recent companies-not-disclosing-their-online-activity news like this, the Washington Post brings us this little gem.

The Post writes about a company in Arlington, Va., called New Media Strategies. NMS is a company that provides online monitoring services for clients ranging from movie studios to politicians. Reading the article makes this sound like a fun place to work for a combination geek-and-media-junkie like me. But they’re doing more than just monitoring, as the Post writes:

Over the past few years, the “online analysts” have helped the companies track their reputations, found ways to get their products noticed and joined online conversations to help steer them the way clients want them to go.

Monitoring and “steering”? What a deal!

Immediately, ethics concerns arise. Eagarly awaiting that part of the article — “I hope the write about…!” — I make the jump to the Post article’s second page, which reveals:

Curran said she is careful to acknowledge her connection to clients when it’s required. All online marketers have to walk a fine line when they work the blogosphere. Federal Trade Commission rules require them to identify their roles when they’re making a point on behalf of a client, but if they’re gossiping about the latest episode of “Desperate Housewives” they can legally be as anonymous as anyone else.

Disclosure “when it’s required”? “Can legally be” anonymous? Sure, maybe it’s legal, but hopefully the folks at Edelman/Wal-Mart have learned that there’s more to this than the law. All of us in public relations, marketing, advertising, communication and the like are trying hard to figure out how to do our jobs well in these wild and crazy times, and there are surely no set-in-stone rules right now. Still, I think most will say that only disclosing a professional, client-employee relationship in these types of forums only when legally required is not enough.

The Public Relations Society of America has a code of ethics (PDF) for its members that says, among other things on the topic of disclosure, “Reveal the sponsors for causes and interests represented.” The Word of Mouth Marketing Association, of which Edelman is a member, has a code of ethics, too, which Edelman helped create. WOMMA has set up a Web page dedicated to discussing Edelman and it’s lack of blogging disclosure.

All of this points one thing: Following the law isn’t enough when it comes to disclosure. Professional communicators should follow a strong code of ethics. I hope New Media Strategies has stronger ethics than this article depicts.

Tags: ethics, monitoring, public relations, Web by Mike Keliher
3 Comments »