Dorree Gurdak, a VP in our consumer practice, spoke on a social media panel at Utica College today. As she was preparing, we sat down to discuss some question the moderator had sent in advance. I thought it would be good to share what we discussed.

Do you think the power of the traditional news media will diminish in the future because of the growth of the Internet and its social media?

Ultimately it will; but not quickly and not without a fight. What is already happening is a morphing of the traditional media into more social media-like structures. On USAToday’s Web site for example, users can rate stories that determine where those stories appear on the home page. Many traditional media outlets are providing sections for user comment and many now have blogs written by their reporters.

One of the biggest issues facing the traditional media is the shift in advertising revenue. It’s creating something of a downward spiral – less ad revenue means fewer reporters (and more reliance on non-differentiated wire service content) which means less value to readers which leads to lower circulations and even less ad revenue.

Last Fall I wrote summaries of a three part series at the MIT Communications Forum “Why Newspapers Matter” that discussed the state and future of traditional media in the face of social media. Here are links to the posts:

The Emergence of Citizens’ Media
News, Information and the Wealth of Networks
Why Newspapers Matter

Is citizen journalism (anyone can report the news) an opportunity for public relations professionals? What are the downsides of citizen journalism?

Citizen journalism can certainly be an opportunity for communications professionals. We have to be careful though to study the community and get a sense of what is and isn’t acceptable. We also need to be completely transparent about who we are and with whom we are working. Hubris can also be a problem. We can’t treat social media or citizen journalism as a place to say whatever we want. One of the strengths of social media is there are thousands of fact checkers out there, and if people monkey around with the facts they will be called out on it.

In terms of downside, there is plenty. Just as there are thousands of fact checkers, there are likewise thousands of content creators. Mostly this is a good thing, but it can lead to problems. First, it results in a sea of content that’s hard to filter and evaluate. Second, it’s difficult to determine the amount of credibility or trust we assign to different sources – the mass of fact checkers can help weed out the utter nonsense, but there is a lot of crap out there that needs to be ignored. Third, without editorial direction there is some pretty piss-poor writing, which gives citizen journalism a black eye.

How are the news media and organizations responding to the next generation’s desire for customized information?

The desire for customized information isn’t a generational thing. With Tivo, video on demand, pay-per-view, iPods, etc. everyone is becoming used to being able to get the content they want when and where they want it. That trend will only broaden and continue.

There are plenty of tools and approaches – user ratings, comments, filtering, etc. – to help make customization work. Most people are just so inundated with information they are looking for ways to get to what is most important to them quickly and easily. RSS is one tool that virtually every news organization now uses. It allows people to have the specific they want delivered automatically.

How and to what degree should public relations practitioners monitor the blogosphere?

We absolutely have to be monitoring what is being said online. There are, in some cases, thousands of conversations taking place that relate to our clients, their industries, customers, competitors, etc. These conversations have always been going on, but they were usually one-on-one conversations that happened and were over. Now, these conversations are among large groups or people, spark additional and often unanticipated discussions and are preserved for all to see online. Ignoring them or pretending they don’t matter or aren’t happening is foolish.

This is especially true since monitoring them is easy. Searches can be set up and subscribed to as RSS feeds so on a real-time bases all of the discussions (and frankly more than can be reasonably monitored) can be tracked.

Should public relations practitioners develop relationships with key industry bloggers? If so, how? Does it differ from traditional media relations?

There are a couple of distinct classes of bloggers and they need to be viewed and treated differently. First, there are traditional media editors and reporters who blog in addition to writing for their print or online outlets. Most PR people already have good relationships with the media and this is simply an extension of those relationships.

The second are large blogs that have evolved to the point where they have traditional editorial structures – GigaOM is an example, as are sites like Engadget or Gizmodo. We can work with them very much like we work with the traditional media. The biggest difference is that we need to use tone and language that’s appropriate. Unvarnished marketing language isn’t going to work in this environment.

The third group are probably the most numerous and most difficult to engage. These are people who are writing because they care about a topic for personal reasons – a hobby, a challenge, a passion. Working with these people requires reading what they have to say and genuinely connecting with them. You also have to be crystal clear about who you are and whom you’re working for. These relationships work when everyone is open, honest and engaged.

What are the information trends for organizational Web sites?

There are a few trends happening. One is increasing transparency – with some companies and executives being really frank about what’s happening within their organization. The Web is not a real good place for secrets (see hubris above). Most information – whether we like it or not – can be found; and once it’s found it can be distributed, commented on and take on a life of its own.

Another trend is the attempt to help people make sense of information. The popularity of RSS and tag clouds are examples of this. You’re also seeing organizations starting to create communities or share content on sites like Flickr, Facebook, etc. This is important because it allows a connection with people who might never visit a Web site and to become a part of the communities where people actually spend their time online.

GregPC

Yesterday the WSJ story on Google’s plans to allow comments on news stories made the rounds in our office. I was pretty tied up so didn’t have a chance to read the article until today. I’ve had a few conversations with people and come across a few discussions since yesterday. One person thought that this was a “marked departure” in the way news is done since now there’s an opportunity for people who are quoted – or companies that are covered – to supplement or comment on a story.

I guess I just don’t see this as being such a radical thing. Google is going to allow vetted comments (at this point they are soliciting comments) to appear on their news page; but not in the context of an article itself. To read the news, a visitor will still need to follow the link to the original source leaving the comments behind. It sounds to me like a more restrictive version of Digg – news with comments from a chosen few – but without any of the colorful community commentary we’ve come to know and love.

And it isn’t like Digg is alone in allowing the community to add their thoughts. Mainstream media sites like USA Today have had this capability for some time. In their case, readers are able to rate stories (positive ratings only) which helps determine how high on the page they appear.

And just in case you haven’t heard – blogs have been providing a channel for anyone to say pretty much anything they want about stories in the news (or anything else for that matter) for kind of a while.

So what does this development mean for PR pros? Well, it may mean that you’ll be able to add your two cents on Google’s news pages – which could be a very cool thing; but if you’ve got two cents to contribute, there are plenty of places you can do that right now.

Frankly, were it not for the fact that this came out of Google, I don’t think the Journal would have even considered covering the story.

In late June I took the plunge and attended my first Social Media Club event. While it was difficult to neglect my usually nightly line up of reality shows, I soon realized that these events bring together a more varied cast than “The Real World.” Please note that unlike “The Real World” there were no drunken brawls, dramatic fits or Jacuzzi scenes—that I was privy to anyways…

There were, however, a few messages/themes that resonated with me last night, the first of which I will discuss in this blog entry, the fear of social media. (Cue the spooky music)

Fear of Social Media

One of the main messages to be conveyed last night was that people, clients, colleagues and parents, are afraid of the prospect of social media. But this is to be expected; of course people are going to be frightened by the prospect of something new.. There is always the fear of the unknown, it’s natural, human. Heck, I was even a bit nervous before I got to the event.

But it’s apparent that the questions that people are asking about how social media will affect their brand are the same questions that some are still asking about PR. I think anyone who’s ever worked in an agency can relate to the feeling you get when a client asks you for the equation for coverage. But, I am proud to say that I have finally discovered the equation, it took me 3 months, several cases of Diet Coke and a loom of paper, but I’ve got it!

PR and SM are about putting your company “out there” and engaging with other people. In PR you are connecting with the media, with SM it’s engaging with the community. In both circumstances there are unknowns; reporters could pose a question about a company scandal, a topic that you’re not supposed to comment on, or they could write a horrible article about you and put it on the cover. In the SM community there are also unknowns; someone could post nasty comments to your blog, they could write something negative on a message board or upload a video on YouTube where they burn one of your products in a sadistic ritual.

To guard against this type of uncertainty you need to be armed with the proper information—what they are saying about you. You would never walk blindly into an interview with a reporter that had written poorly about your company in the past. Research would be done about the articles and his sources and you’d be prepared to answer the tough questions. The same should be done with SM. Instead of taking a swan dive into a community that has looked at your company with an unfavorable eye, read and listen to what is being said. After that, you can formulate your best responses and defenses.

Let’s face it, there are going to be people that are going to talk badly about you regardless, and the issues you’ve tried to hide under the rug are going to get stirred up. It basically comes down to this; do you want them saying it behind your back or do you want them saying it to your face, so at least you will have the chance to defend yourself.

What are your thoughts? Would you rather sit by and be talked about or have a say in the conversation?

*Cheri Lapane

Las month’s Cambridge Chamber of Commerce event – Web Marketing and Social Media for Small Businesses – was billed as an opportunity for members (and others) to get a handle on what’s happening in these areas. We had started planning for it back in May and event came off really well.

There were three panelists:

Me (that’s GregPC) – I tried to set things up by talking about social media in a general sense, why someone might consider using social media and to get started.

Scott Smigler, Exclusive Concepts – Scott addressed search engine optimization. I hear this term bandied about all the time but probably haven’t given it the thought or consideration it deserves. I thought Scott did a great job explaining the concept, making it relevant and giving people enough information and ideas to get started.

Matt Malloy, Zipcar.com – Matt was terrific. He’s the VP of Marketing and Sales Operations and he was really the proof in the pudding. Here’s a company that succeeded and grew through the disciplined use of social media and Web marketing. Having a well-considered and integrated plan was really Matt’s mantra; and he made a strong case that made a lot of sense to me and to many of the attendees.

The three of use were very ably introduced by our own Lisa Pintchman (kudos to Lisa!) There were 40 or so people in the room and they asked really good questions once we’d wrapped up the formal program. Caryn Saitz, who coordinated the event, did a nice job putting everything together and the venue, the gallery at 38 Cameron in Cambridge, was also very cool.

Recently, Weber Shandwick announced the results of the survey, “New Wave of Advocacy” which demonstrated that decision-making and speed-to-response are shifting radically. I thought that the study – which looked at behaviors in nine countries – might be a good way to introduce this site and this thinking to the New England communications community. Let me share with you some of the findings:

Decision-making among global consumers has accelerated in recent years. Nearly two-thirds of global consumers reported they are deciding more quickly to support or reject issues, causes, companies, products and services than they did two to three years ago.

The democratization of Advocacy. Nearly one out of two global consumers is identified as an Advocate. Advocates take action to support or detract from issues, causes, companies and products, such as making purchase recommendations, sending a letter to a company or elected official, or standing up against something in which they don’t believe.

High-intensity Advocates are critical to reach. The most vital Advocates, individuals in this group represent a small nine percent of global consumers. They more actively influence others’ decisions, make decisions faster and demonstrate their support zealously.

Badvocates waste no time. This important segment represents 20 percent of global consumers surveyed. Badvocates actively make their dissatisfaction known more quickly today than two or three years ago.

Advocacy is more common in Europe and Asia than in the United States. This finding reveals that there are both opportunities as well as challenges for multinational marketers who want to communicate their messages more broadly to global audiences.

Both traditional and new media play critical roles in forming Advocates’ opinions. Advocates’ opinions about issues, causes, companies, brands and products are more strongly influenced by the media than non-Advocates’ opinions. Following broadcast and print, online media ranks third in importance of opinion influence among all global consumers.

So how does all of this play out here in New England? There are at least a couple of things to consider. The first is that New England is a very relationship/word-of-mouth driven region. Just looking at the PR industry, it has been historically difficult for agencies without roots in New England to arrive and thrive here. New Englanders have a reputation – deserved or not – of being reserved when it comes to outsiders. On the other hand, there is a strong sense of loyalty and solidarity among people in the region that leads them to look to one another for ideas, advice and counsel. (The historical causes for this are debatable but it remains a fact of life for many here.)

Another connection between the idea of advocacy and New England is the work being done in the region to understand how and why the changes outlined in the survey findings matter. No where on earth are more serious minds turned to consider the issues of communication, technology and their shared impact than here. The Berkman Center at Harvard looks heavily and closely at the connection of the Internet to society. At MIT, there is important work being done around New Media Literacy which aims to help people deconstruct, understand and recreate content for themselves and their communities. Developing this skill – and the ability to communicate clearly – are roles for the advocate.

We’re proud to be a part of the New England community; to be active participants in the discussions around the changing nature of communication and to be advancing the idea and cause of advocacy as an important change in how public relations operates.

Micho Spring