Dan Gillmor is a nationally known technology columnist for the San Jose Mercury News, Silicon Valley's paper of record. His syndicated column runs in many other U.S. newspapers. Gillmor's daily weblog for SiliconValley.com, an online affiliate of the Mercury News, is read by nearly 500,000 people each month.
Later this month, O'Reilly will publish Dan's first book, We the Media. In the book Dan writes that grassroots journalists (such as bloggers) are dismantling Big Media's monopoly on the news, transforming it from a lecture to a conversation. He believes the impact is just beginning to be felt by professional journalists and the newsmakers they cover. The public relations profession needs to adapt too and Dan devotes much of an entire chapter to this topic.
I recently conducted an email interview with Dan focused on how grassroots journalism is changing how we should listen to customers and respond to crises. If you have additional questions on this topic for Dan that are not covered here, please leave a comment here and I will forward a selection of these to him for further elaboration as his schedule permits.
STEVE RUBEL: Dan, as weblogs and personal journalism mushroom, will companies become more prone to crises? Which kinds of firms are most vulnerable?
DAN GILLMOR: Apart from the kinds of difficult situations all companies can find themselves in from time to time, there may be heightened vulnerability to a new kind of problem. For example, customers, employees or gadflies might use blogs or other new media to reveal information a company might otherwise have wanted to keep secret.
I don't necessarily believe that companies are in greater danger if they have internal bloggers, however. With proper guidelines, employee bloggers are among the greatest PR assets any enterprise can have.
RUBEL: Weblogs and personal/amateur journalism mean greater transparency. Does this mean PR pros will lose complete control of their company's reputation? What opportunity is there here for PR pros to shape reputations?
GILLMOR: Not at all. The PR mission evolves. But it's important for people to understand that a) they never had complete control in the first place; and b) "control" is a mistaken notion. Think in terms of managing, not controlling, what clients say and what is said about them.
The risks are growing on one level. Bloggers and other grassroots media -including the increasingly ubiquitous digital camera - are uncovering information many companies might prefer to keep secret and then spreading what they learn to anyone else who cares. Customers help each other "hack" products today in ways companies might not like. And some of the information that gets spread is false.
The opportunities are also growing. Using the same tools, companies can communicate better with their various constituencies: customers, suppliers, employees, community. With a more human than PR-laden voice, they can explain what is happening and why. They can have a conversation with these constituencies, via comments, bulletin boards, etc. They can enjoy the value that comes from listening to people's ideas.
PR folks also can use RSS to distribute routine news, instead of clogging up the e-mail inboxes of journalists who are already overwhelmed. And they can be careful to pitch the right people at any given organization, rather than blasting messages widely.
RUBEL: How has a journalist's job changed in this new era of communications?
GILLMOR: Journalists have to use the tools, and we have to learn to listen better. In an emerging era of multi-directional, digital communications, the audience is becoming be an integral part of the process or journalism. In fact, the audience *must* be part.
This boils down to one of my mantras: Our readers (or viewers or listeners) collectively know more than we do. This is not a threat, but an opportunity. We need to recognize and, in the best sense of the word, use their knowledge. Our former "consumers" have more choices now, and they'll use them.
Journalists have to embrace blogging and other grassroots media, for ourselves and for our communities.
RUBEL: The media are an important part of this country's checks and balance system. As blogs and participatory journalism take off is the media becoming more relevant or less?
GILLMOR: Since I include blogs and participatory media as part of the media, I'd say the media are becoming more relevant. But even assuming that we're talking about new media as a separate entity, I don't think mainstream media are necessarily less relevant in the mission of helping people keep themselves informed. The new entrants are adding context and facts and viewpoints that we - and readers who want to know more - can use to create more complete news reports.
RUBEL: Recently we both - on our individual blogs - re-reported some news that was partially inaccurate and promptly took steps to correct it. You're a pro journalist. I am simply a blogger. Do we each "live" by a separate code of ethics?
GILLMOR:Apparently we don't. We both felt obliged to post corrections/clarifications to what one of the parties in the dispute said was incorrect. Some bloggers - and some major media outlets - might not have felt any such obligation. I'm more comfortable correcting the record.
RUBEL: How should PR pros monitor the blogosphere for potential crises?
GILLMOR: Avidly, but not just for crises. With sites like Technorati and Feedster, it's becoming almost trivial to track what people are saying about you. If they're offering praise, a company can use that to do an even better job. If they're complaining, there's an opportunity to fix what's wrong.
RUBEL: What steps should professional journalists take in following up on damaging news they find on Weblogs?
GILLMOR: Check it out. This applies to all responsible media.
RUBEL: Why/why not should PR pros chase down every rumor they see online?
GILLMOR: Life is too short to track everything. But it's vital to track down the ones that are seriously damaging or wonderfully positive. Your critics can help you learn how to do things better; pay attention.
RUBEL: Why do you feel that trade secrets are dying?
GILLMOR:Threatened, not dying. Because technology reaches into everything we touch, with things like digital cameras, blogs and a global reach, it's getting harder to keep secrets. More important, the reason for keeping secrets in most cases is less compelling. Transparency is almost always a better strategy than secrecy.
RUBEL: What impact might regulation have on weblogs/personal journalism? What should we watch for?
GILLMOR: Potentially the most dangerous is the emerging duopoly of cable and phone "broadband" carriers. They'll have every incentive to turn today's open-access lines into walled gardens, or to allow some content to get to people before other content. This duopoly could make the already problematic corporate consolidation of media seem tame.
The copyright industry, meanwhile, is trying to outlaw all kinds of technologies that will be essential for the creation of a true grassroots media. Unfortunately, Congress has been on the wrong side of issues such as fair use and copying for personal use. Intellectual property is turning into a license for older industries to thwart innovation, and we have to fix this disaster.
RUBEL: How can PR pros use blogs - either penned by their own employees or outsiders- to their advantage in responding to crises?
GILLMOR: Tell the truth. Tell it quickly. Tell as much as you can. People crave a genuine, human voice in times of crisis.
RUBEL: Finally, are PR pros paying enough attention to all of these changes? If not, what will it take for this to occur?
GILLMOR: Some are, most aren't yet. I don't expect every PR person to get this right away, but I do sense a growing recognition that something important has changed. The word is getting out.
Author: Steve Rubel | Jul 15, 04 | Permalink
| 3 comments
Category: @ Steve Rubel | Topic 4 Crisis Management
Steve,
Thanks for the interview with Dan. With Robert Scoble's interview yesterday, several points come together for me. All about the changing nature of the communications relationship between companies and customers.
John
Posted by: John Cass at July 15, 2004 10:53 PM
John: I hope you share those points with us in the Final Thoughts category we are adding. I am sure we will learn a lot from them!
Posted by: Elizabeth Albrycht at July 16, 2004 05:15 AM
And excellent interview. I hope the PR community really listens to - and respects - what Dan is saying.
"Customers help each other "hack" products today in ways companies might not like. And some of the information that gets spread is false."
But much more of it will be true. That's the part that should really worry PR and advertising professionals.
The fact is, people are fed up with being lied to. We're tired of liars - in government, corporations, and elsewhere. We know about how products are made and the creepy psychology and research that goes into selling it.
I think the crisis for your industry (PR, etc) is that you've bought into your own bullshit for far too long.
Trouble is, you think *we* buy it too!
If PR and advertisers hope to be "effective" in the age of participatory media they're going to have to start treating people (i.e., consumers) with more respect. Stop presenting us with sexist, racist, classist messages and be accountable to the environment and human rights.
Maybe even apologize for treating people and the planet so shamefully for so long.
Most of all, you must understand that you cannot regulate or control the truth. Make that your new mantra.
Posted by: Hoi Poloi at July 18, 2004 01:17 PM
Comments