Comments on: Why ethical PR bloggers can’t tell the truth

By: Elizabeth Albrycht

Elizabeth Albrycht — Tue, 27 Sep 2005 09:54:53 +0000

I really enjoyed this article Philip. Complete disclosure as you describe it leads us to a self-referential paraysis where the information you are trying to communicate gets lost under an avalanche of justifications. That in itself could be deemed unethical if you use it as a tactic to hide exactly what it is that you are required to state.

Clearly, PR people (as anyone else) need to make judgment calls about what to be transparent about. I like your “yardstick” as it is useful in day-to-day decisions. However, what we need to ensure is that when the question comes, the pathways of judgment can be made visible, i.e., you can trace the decision process backwards and identify the forks and justify the decision.

So, to restate a little, we need to have some guidelines as to what the currently socially acceptable practice of transparency is at any point in time (it will most certainly change) in order to be considered ethical, and secondly, some generally accepted processes in place to safeguard the history of the decisions and judgments we make.

By: Moderne-Unternehmenskommunikation.de » Global PR Blog Week 2.0: L�uft noch

Moderne-Unternehmenskommunikation.de » Global PR Blog Week 2.0: L�uft noch — Fri, 23 Sep 2005 13:41:32 +0000

[…] Why ethical PR bloggers can�t tell the truth von Philip Young, University of Sunderland. Hier geht um den Zusammenhang von Blogs, Ethischer PR und Corporate Responsibility. Er versucht hier eine realistische Einsch�tzung, inwieweit Blogs wirklich zur Transparenz von Prozessen beitragen k�nnen. Klingt sehr vern�nftig und “down to earth”. […]

By: Bernie

Bernie — Thu, 22 Sep 2005 14:28:28 +0000

Philip, you mention that where Commercial blogs are concerned, guidelines are needed for businesses and organisations as to tone, nuance, positioning etc - you also mention the notion of ‘duty of care’ to provide this guidance …. I wholeheartedly agree and would have thought this was imperative in one sense from a corporate governance and reputational management issue - aligning with duty of care to shareholders - since a badly positioned blog could presumably cause significant reputational damage……..You also mention the issue of the ‘inevitable grey area’ in terms of blog nuances and levels of appropriateness and particular positions … this again seems key, as you say, particularly when examining the issue of employee blogging in relation to the delicacies of reputational management in this context … given this … do you think today’s PR advisors are up to speed in such grey areas?

By: Philip Young

Philip Young — Thu, 22 Sep 2005 06:41:25 +0000

Dave, I read and enjoyed your article, and am pleased to have an opportunity to link to it. I agree “There’s no reason why a fake blog cannot be interesting, amusing and informative, while also having the desirous blog characteristics of credibility and authenticity within the context of the blog itself, ” and appreciate the definition you introduce, that of the ’story blog’.
As my concluding comment were meant illustrate, there is nothin wrong - maybe even something good, about what you cast as story blogs; perhaps the fault is with my expression, but I don’t see that this is incompatible with a view that astroturf blogs are indeed unethical. What I am also saying is that with this, as with almost all ethical debates, it is easy to say what is right or wrong but much harder to pick out a clear dividing line between in the inevitable grey area that separates the identifiable positions.

By: Dave Taylor

Dave Taylor — Thu, 22 Sep 2005 02:21:26 +0000

“It is easy to decry fake blogs, astro-turfing and other dubious techniques where the intention is clearly to deceive and the practices are undeniably unethical”

Don’t you think that you’re making a lot of assumptions about fake blogs that might not be accurate? Perhaps it depends on our definitions, but I challenge you to tell me how a fictitious story made up by a PR firm to promote a product is any different from a fictitious weblog, Philip. See my Global PR Week 2.0 article on this subject for my two (three?) cents on this subject:

http://www.globalprblogweek.com/2005/09/19/taylor-fake-blogs/