HOME OBSESSIONS - Media/Comm - Writing - Education - Music FAQ HEROES CAREER BLOG - RSS CONTACT This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License. arch emisou panton
	Phil's Blogservations Monday, December 17, 2007 Posted by philgomes 9:01 AM Chip Griffin And The Social Media Rulebook Chip Griffin And The Social Media Rulebook There's certainly a lot for the Web 2.0 zealots to learn from Chip Griffin's piece "Throwing Out The Social Media Rulebook". (Despite the efforts of those who strive to mischaracterize my work, I'm hardly one of those said "zealots".) Chip brings up some good points, though I can't help but feel that some of the others are strawman arguments thrown up and positioned as a norm such that they could be easily knocked down. This ultimately blunts what would have otherwise been a quite powerful piece. One at a time, shall we? 1. It Isn’t a Blog Without RSS. First, who is really saying this? Now, I remember Robert Scoble (in)famously said that people building a marketing site without RSS "should be fired". Extreme, I'll admit, but his argument went way beyond blogs to RSS'ing pretty much everything. I will say, though, that RSS certainly helps (a lot) in terms of attention and share-ability. Besides which, isn't this a non-issue? What blogging software doesn't offer RSS or Atom syndication? Chris challenges his readers "Go ask someone outside of the tight social media circle you play in and ask them if they use an RSS reader." True enough. However, even if RSS's penetration is in the teens-of-a-percentile, it's important for professional communicators to understand its value. Think: Someday soon, Grandma Eunice isn't going to have to know from RSS or Atom. All she'll have to know is that if she asks her computer where all the enthusiast-generated quilting shows are online, there's a mechanism by which she can find it (us nerds call it search) and be informed of updates (which us nerds call RSS). Communicators need to know how this mechanism works, Eunice doesn't... She just needs to be able to use and find value in it, which is another issue. 2. It Isn’t a Blog Without Comments. I'm sure some folks have said this, but unlocking the comments feature isn't for everyone or every company. After all, this blog didn't open up for comments until August 2005 after four years. The presumptive heresy of a comment-disabled blog will, I believe, go by the wayside. The argument is getting to be about as silly as the so-called "Fairness Doctrine", a now-defunct regulation that was introduced in the '40s and '50s to ensure that various political views got relatively equal play during a time when media choices and broadcast spectrum were scarce. Today, the concept of limited media choice sounds almost quaint and, thus, the "Fairness Doctrine" is moot. Similarly, people can have conversations about a blog post in all kinds of places other than that person's blog. Tools like Technorati make these conversations easy to follow and will only get more mainstream, as Chip has no doubt noticed. That said, a company communicates a certain confidence when it allows comments on its blog. For this reason (regulatory issues aside), enabling comments can send a powerful message. Also, some companies blog in order to gain the attention of the so-called "A-list", of whose protection-racket tendencies I'm not entirely fond. If that's your goal (and there are reasons for and against) then you had best enable those comments. (For the record, my most successful projects purposely ignored the A-list. My least successful ones involved them. Reason: Except for a precious few, many of them are just a little too far away from the empowered everyman ideals they claim to hold sacred.) 3. The Press Release is Dead. Sure, people have said this. Readers of this blog certainly know my position on the whole "[x] is dead" meme. The press release (I actually prefer the term "news release") still has great, and demonstrable, value. This is a topic that's not worth belaboring here and now, though. 4. The Social Media Release is King. I don't think even Todd Defren has said or even meant to imply any regal supremacy of a particular tool. That said, any attempts to bring that crusty ol' chestnut of the PR profession, the humble press release, into the 21st century is a worthwhile effort. (I wish more attention was paid to good writing, though.) Of course, Edelman has certainly participated with the development of StoryCrafter and even deployed it in a couple markets outside the U.S. None of this even remotely qualifies as a coronation of a concept — the social media release — that is clearly a public experiment and evolving work-in-progress. 5. It’s All About Conversation Not Messages. First, the two aren't necessarily mutually exclusive. Second, as I'm fond of saying, while there's little room for "messaging" these days — defined as the rote and brainless repetition of some kind of committee-developed mantra — a company, organization, or individual will always have a "message". Otherwise, there just isn't much reason to communicate in the first place! It sounds like a plyoctomist's semantic exercise, but I argue it's an important distinction. 6. The Customer Controls the Relationship. Here, I think Chip just wanted to fire a shot across the U.S.S. Cluetrain's bow, but didn't really want to make the case or argument. He maintains that, aside from having a "significant impact on companies", providing "the ideas to enhance products and the inspiration to create new ones" and, most importantly, "[voting] with their wallets to determine winners and losers in the marketplace"... no, the customer doesn't really control the relationship. Sound like a weird line of reasoning or an odd way to make that point? It was. He says "Companies still play a huge role in the process and all of us as communicators must understand that." Who denies the company's role here? I don't believe that any reasonable marketer has rejected the role that the companies play in this dance of commerce. 7. Authenticity and Transparency are Immutable Truths. This item here is somewhat conflated with the topic of ghostwriting. I disagree that a blog and, say, a whitepaper or speech all similarly tolerate the notion of the communications professional actively ghostwriting the content. For one thing, a blog is, at its core, a vehicle for conversation (an exchange of ideas and even maybe, gasp, messages), not lecture (delivery of a message without the expectation of conversation in the real-time or near-real-time sense). It has little to do with an unwritten rulebook — it's a component of the art itself. This alone fundamentally changes the dynamic, especially where the role of a communications consultant is concerned. Second, publishing a blog sends the signal that the person whose name they see in the "posted by" footer is the person whose voice the audience is hearing. If a client isn't willing to work on this basis, then a usually counsel them toward another social media vehicle (e.g., podcasting) or... get this... none at all. In this case, to crib from Marshall McLuhan (of whom I was never a fan), the medium truly is the message. So what is a PR person to do? I see my role as helping a client to find its voice online. Mastery of the language of the boardroom has its crucial place, yes, but companies also find themselves in an online environment where re-learning the language of the living room could be a component of their success as well. I may counsel in terms of indicating an important conversation, a course of action/response, or even the tone of a client's writing, but I stop well short of ghostwriting. And it results in agency/client partnerships that meet and exceed their goals. "I know," as comedian Ron White says. "I've seen me do it." 8. Audience is a Word of the Past. I do know a number of Cluetrainiacs hold to this philosophy, but I've always thought it silly. When any professional communicator is evaluating social media as a communications vehicle, he or she better be able to answer the question "What audience(s) do we intend to reach with this?" I'm not sure how communicators are able to have this conversation with a client or c-suite without answering this question. If the answer is "audience-schmaudience", they'll be pounding pavement in no time. 9. Lack of Comments Means Lack of Influence. This is another one where I'm not entirely sure who exactly is saying this. In fact, I'll say there have been times when a post without many comments has lead me to wonder what kind of backchannel chatter — where any real business might take place — it inspired. In this, as in the other eight items, more specific citations might have been helpful. That said, if someone's posts yield little more than the sound of <r1<k375, one nevertheless has to wonder who is in the audience, if anyone. In short... Good show, Chip. Good points. Good thinking. Happy to review your next draft. Other thoughts on the post include: Des Walsh: "Like a number of the people commenting, I am sympathetic to the view put forward in the original post and in fact have often made similar observations about 'rules' that people presume to make for blogs." Brian Solis: "I agree with the premise. I found however, that many of the reasons aren't grasping the full story of 'why' some of the rules do or do not make sense." John Cass: "If you are working within a community it is important to understand the social conventions." Susan Getgood: "As I've written here many times, to argue that there is only one right way to do something is silly." Shel Holtz: "That said, I agree with some of Chip’s specific assertions and disagree with others—even though I agree that none of these are actual rules." Neville Hobson: "I agree with Chip that we must ditch such rigid rules. In any event, things are rarely so black and white but instead come in shades of grey. Chip’s post is beginning to attract some thoughtful commentary, not simply agree/disagree but offering extended points of view." Update: Corrected a minor formatting error and a repeated "is". Technorati Tags: chip griffin, social media | HOME | OBSESSIONS | FAQ | HEROES | CAREER | BLOG | CONTACT Note that the views expressed on this site do not necessarily reflect those of Phil's employer, its business partners, its clients, or anyone or anything that doesn't come from Phil's demented imagination. Hell, to be perfectly honest, even Phil disagrees with what he thinks sometimes. This site has virtually no redeeming qualities whatsoever. Clicking on a link doesn't automatically send a 1/2-cent donation to UNICEF. You can't buy, sell, auction, swap, find a date, win friends, influence people, cross the chasm, or decode the human genome using this site. You won't get free email. You won't win a free video game console. This site will not end world hunger, foster peace in the Middle East, help you smell better, teach you how to swing dance, or move the global economy from petroleum to hydrogen fuels. You'll learn a lot about this site's master, though, which amounts to a haphazard collection of strange and useless facts that pretty much won't help you at all.	ABOUT THIS BLOG This is the blog of Phil Gomes, SVP with Edelman Digital and senior advisor to the Society for New Communications Research. This blog not only discusses PR and media matters, but Phil's everyday observations about a variety of topics. Phil currently resides in Chicago, IL. EMAIL phil[at] philgomes.com View my page on PROpenMic SYNDICATE Feedburner ARCHIVE YAHOO! IM SKYPE WISH LIST PITCH POLICY MY PHOTOS www.flickr.com Photostream RSS Enter your Email Powered by FeedBlitz COMMENT AND TRACKBACK POLICY Comments and trackbacks are unmoderated, though I will delete the patently offensive ones. Any comments and trackbacks are the opinions of the individual writer of those comments and trackbacks, and not those of Phil Gomes, his employer, its clients, or its business partners. If you have a bone to pick, bug the people who wrote the comment or trackback.