“Scared to let our people blog”

Kevin O’Keefe points to an excellent post by Liz Strauss, an expert in corporate online communications. Whether they say the words or not, many companies are afraid to let their employees blog. Liz wonders “is the blog the problem?”

“Look to the people. Isn’t the issue one of trust and control? The employer is concerned about what employees might write on the blog. We let employees talk to customers daily — answering email, answering phone call, answering questions at exhibits, and answering letters at the office. We trust what they write on behalf of our company. We once worried in the same way about the telephone and email.

It comes down to hiring and training employees who make good decisions. If we trust our ability to choose the right employees and to let them know the values that we hold for our company and our customers, the question of whether we should let them blog falls away as an issue. A blog is a powerful, customer-facing tool. Like a computer, it’s as strong as the people we choose to use it.”

Kevin was told recently of one senior lawyer who was told by the firm that they would not be permitted to blog. ‘The firm does not allow its lawyers to blog.’

The lawyer responded with a question. ‘Why am I working at a place that does not trust me to talk about what I do – about a niche in the law I am passionate about?’

“The Beltway-Blog Battle”

Writing in Time Magazine, James Poniewozek has an interesting take (The Beltway-Blog Battle) on the passing of Tim Russert.

“…the press lost its most authoritative mass-market journalist, just as it is losing its authority and its mass market.”

The New Meida vs. Old Media argument got tiresome a long time ago, but Mr. Poniewozek offers a fresh take. A few paragraphs to wet your whistle:

“In their original division of labor, the old media broke news while the blogs dispensed opinion. But look at two of the biggest stories of the Democratic primary: Barack Obama’s comments that working-class voters are “bitter” and Bill Clinton’s rope-line rant that a reporter who profiled him was a “scumbag.” Both were broken by a volunteer for the Huffington Post website, Mayhill Fowler.

Traditional reporters were aghast at Fowler’s methods–the Obama meeting was closed to press (she got in as a donor), and Fowler did not identify herself when speaking to Clinton. But mainstream media had no problem treating the scoops as big news; if she had overheard both quotes in the same way but told them to a newspaper instead of publishing them, that would have been considered a coup.

The case against Fowler, in other words, was about process and credentials, not content. If sources stop trusting us, reporters asked, how will we do our jobs? But however sneaky her methods, Fowler’s stories prove that one reason sites like Huffington have an audience is the perception that Establishment journalism has gotten better at serving its powerful sources than its public. Fiascoes like the Iraq-WMD reporting gave many the impression that the old rules mainly protect consultant-cosseted public officials who need protection least.”

[For more on the Mayhill Fowler story, here’s a bit of audio with Arianna Huffington, speaking at Guardian News & Media’s internal Future of Journalism event on 18th June 2008.]

Mr. Poniewozik poses this rather rude question regarding MSM: “…if 3 million people read Drudge and 65,000 read the New Republic, which is mainstream?”

This blog’s reading level: Elementary School

Elementary_schoolI checked this a couple of years ago with the same results. The reading level of smays.com is elementary school, according to this website. The high end of the scale goes up college (maybe grad school?) and I think elementary school is the low end (do pre-schoolers read?).

I know it doesn’t sound like it, but I think it might be a good thing to write at a level that third graders can follow. I assure you, I’m not trying to write down to anyone. The words you read are the ones in hear in my head. Hmm. See smays blog. Blog smays, blog.

“This blogging stuff”

Springfield Mayor Tom Carlson got all Rottweiler’y on the local press recently and among his complaints, anonymous bloggers:

“On top of that, we have this Internet thing that’s going on now, this blogging stuff. Used to be, if you wanted to say something, you had to put your name it … now, there’s this anonymous character assassination that’s encouraged, in order to sell newspapers or other media outlets.”

It’s been a while since I heard/saw “this Internet thing.” One of my favorite expressions. But His Honor and I do agree on the anonymous blogging issue. He has no way of knowing if the blogger who is ripping him a new one is his opponent. And we have know way of knowing if the blogger who supports his every action is his press secretary.

Coppyblogger Twitter Writing Contest

Congratulations to Ron Gould, first place winner the Coppyblogger Twitter Writing Contest. His winning entry:

“Time travel works!” the note read. “However you can only travel to the past and one-way.” I recognized my own handwriting and felt a chill.

Second place honors went to Anthony Juliano:

“Tony was a snitch, so I wasn’t surprised when his torso turned up in the river. What did surprise me, though, was where they found his head.”

Thelonius Monk took third place for:

“When Gibson hit that homerun in the fall of eighty-eight, my old man had never been so happy. He hugged me for the first time. I was eleven.”

The challenge was to write a story in exactly 140 characters. I fear my humble submission was too… belittling? Too pissy? We’ll never know.

“To my immediate left, a hipster dwarf leaned into his urinal, cleverly achieving a haunting reverb for his “big” finish to Unchained Melody.”

New media can’t get here soon enough

Proto-blogger Dave Winer thinks the real problem revealed by Scott McClellan’s new tell-all book is that the press was complicit in beating the Iraq war drum:

“But corporate-owned media isn’t interested in helping us make decisions as a country, they’re only interested in ad revenue. That’s why it’s so important that we’re creating new media that isn’t so conflicted, and why the question of whether bloggers run ads or not is far from a trivial issue.”

When it comes to national media, there really are not that many outlets that need to be manipulated. Four TV networks; maybe that many cable news channels; a handful of newspapers with national reach. If you can juke them, you’ve got a lot of the country juked.

The sooner their influence is diminished, the better. There will no longer be even the illusion of “national media” and people will have to work (a little) at being informed. Sure, the willfully clueless will still head for blogs and news sites that confirm their view. But the rest of us will stop trusting (if we haven’t already) news organizations that are child’s play for political spin-miesters.

Blogger’s High

E-Media Tidbits points us to an article in the May 2008 Scientific American, by Jennifer Wapner (Blogging: It’s Good for You):

“Blogging may make us feel better because it acts as a substitute or placebo for real satisfaction. Or, according to one neuroscientist cited by Wapner, our limbic (primitive) brain may have an innate need to communicate — akin to our drives for food or sex. Thus, as we blog, our bodies may release the feel-good neurotransmitter dopamine.”

I feel better already.

The Digital Cottage Industry

Agwired

I’ve posted frequently about my friend Chuck, who –with his wife Cindy and a SWAT team of free-lance bloggers– have built a thriving business providing blogging, podcasting and related services to a growing list of clients.

"Cindy and I have been going over calendars and we just realized that we have 23 events scheduled to blog in the next 3 months. Yeeow. Just the hotel reservations, credentialing, registering, airline reservations, etc. are a task. We’ve also got 5 website projects underway just to add to the fun."

Can you make money blogging? For most, the answer is "not likely." For the few, the proud, the Marines… yes. Booyah!