A Class Act

Chip Griffin, the Custom Scoop exec who recently launched his impressive Media Bullseye site for practitioners, has written a wonderful, if occasionally provocative, post that seriously questions some of the rules (actually, conventional wisdom) that have adhered to social media in its short life.

Most of his myth-busters make convincing sense — blogs DON’T HAVE TO have RSS feed or comments, the new tools DON’T HAVE TO be just about conversation, social media news releases HAVE NOT usurped the role of traditional releases — you get the picture.

It’s his seventh point that is cause for concern. He maintains social media’s emphasis on authenticity and transparency as immutable truths is just plain “Wrong-o!” He suggests “There’s a big difference between being fraudulent and getting help behind the scenes.”

A big difference indeed. It’s all those shades of grey in the middle that are worrisome. If organizations truly want to build trust, they’re not going to accomplish it by hiring ghostwriters to churn out blogs for CEOs. If the top exec can’t write, forget about writing a blog. Pass that task on to someone in the organization who can write; don’t slap the CEO’s name on it and pretend he or she is suddenly articulate.

Yes, I know it happens all the time when it comes to letters from the CEO in the Annual Report, or in speeches by executives. Does that somehow make it a perfectly acceptable practice? Sorry, I don’t think so. One of the refreshing things about blogs was that there was an earnest attempt to be a bit more honest about whose words go with the voice.

In my naivete, I was hoping social media’s stab at candour would find its way into other PR venues where word doctors conjure up paragraphs full of slick, unnatural hooey that are unashamedly attributed to others. (When students do it, we call it plagiarism.)

In the social media space, transparency and authenticity aren’t really about living in a glass house or needing a copy editor to fix things up. They’re about being honest and being seen to be honest. It’s worth the effort, because audiences are becoming increasingly weary of PR efforts that fall pathetically short at being up-front.

Two items I’d add to Griffin’s list would be:

Once a post is published it shouldn’t be altered. Seriously, this comes down to copy editing. You made a typo? Go back in and fix it. There are enough poor grammar and typo examples out there without adding to the general sloppiness. If you need to be transparent with an update or reversal on a stand, great; do it and say so.

Commenting is most appropriate while a post is still ‘warm’. Admittedly, this is a fast medium. Social media butterflies truly do love flitting from ‘hot news kerfuffle’ to ‘ hot news kerfuffle’, but the long tail on past posts means the conversation (sorry, did I use the ‘c’ word?) can go on as long as author and readers choose to keep it going. That’s great. It also excuses why I haven’t had a chance to react to Griffin’s post for five days