Enough Already: Getting Social Media All Wrong

I attended the Third Thursday event last night, which was held in SF instead of the usual Palo Alto. About 25 people attended, mostly young, impressionable PR and communications folks eager to learn all about social media: specifically, social media press releases, which were the topic for the evening. But what they heard was -- by my lights -- a seriously watered down version of what social media is, or should be, as the backdrop for a discussion about new media press releases.

The panel was made up of Tom Foremski (of Silicon Valley Watcher), Brian Solis (of FutureWorks PR and PR 2.0), Shel Holtz (of Crayon and A Shel of My Former Self), and some guy from BusinessWire whose name I didn't get. Chris Heuer (of Social Media Club and Idea Engine) moderated.

For those who have missed the idea, a social media press release is supposed to be a webbish/bloggish version of old timey press releases. These will incorporate elements of the now commonplance blog motif: links, tags, comments, and trackbacks, for example.

This all begs the question (which I raised early on in the evening): Why not just use blogs? Why do we need these so-called "social" press releases?

I never really got a deep or usable answer to that question. What I did hear, however, was a widespread misunderstanding of what social media is.

To the participants: Please, please, please don't talk about audiences when you are theoretically promoting social media. As Jay Rosen has suggested, we are the people formerly known as the audience. Blogging is not just another channel for corporate marketing types to push their messages to markets, eyballs, or audiences. Social media is based on the dynamic of a many-to-many dialogue between people. Yes, people: that's the word that should have been used. Not audience. If you'd like to make a distinction between a company and those outside the company, just remember: they are not an audience for your messages, any more than you are an audience for theirs. The whole point is that the people formerly known at the audience -- the edglings, as I call us -- are participating in the blogosphere, and if individuals within companies want to, they can participate: as individuals. Companies don't blog, or converse: people do.

The "wink, wink, nudge, nudge" complicity of leading PR bloggers around serious flaws in the conventional notions of PR is lamentable. For example, seeing the bloggers acknowledge on one hand that CEOs don't actually provide those quotes that are stuck into press releases while on the other hand promoting transparency and openness in corporate communications was more than painful. We should simply state, unequivocally, that such things are not social media: they are old style, push marketing crap. They are exactly the things that lead us to question the motives, influence, and truthfulness of stupid, old line companies who just don't get it.

I could similarly howl about the disembodied third-person voice of press releases, which also does not translate into social media. Everything is written by someone, or a specific group of people, but press releases read like the stone tablets that Moses brought down from Mount Sinai: written by the omniscient hand of God. Likewise the excessive hyperbole and surfeit of superlatives of press releases is distasteful at the least, and demeaning at the most.

Various comments made to my complaints about the gradual change going on in the world of PR make my head hurt. It's bullshit. And it's painful to see leading lights in the new PR era acting as apologists for large, slow-moving, risk averse companies who continue to get it wrong.

Finally, as Doc Searls has pointed out, metaphors matter. Drop the old speak: no more "audience", no more third-party writing, no more "wink, wink" complicity in totally false quotes and knowingly working with clients on spin instead of open dialogue. School your clients to do the right thing, not just wrap themselves in a bunch of psychobabble about social interaction with their "communities" without actually adopting a new mindset.

Come on, guys, do it right. Don't just talk the talk: walk the walk. Otherwise, your clients will never get there. A long list of compromises does not get you half-way to heaven, it's just putting off the real work. And your own credibility will suffer, as well.

[Note: I am working on another post on a very similar topic, which is the misuse of the term social media as a general term for all sorts of social technologies. That is an equally pernicious problem, and I will be addressing it at the Blue Whale Labs blog as the start of a series with Greg Narain. Stay tuned.]

tags : brian solis chris heuer tom foremski shel holtz social media blogging social media press releases third tursday edglings the people formerly known as the audience jay rosen doc searls metaphors matter

Comments

[Brian Oberkirch]

Stowe: excellent. I was starting to feel like a curmudgeon. Here is a post I did called "The Social Media Press Release Doesn't Matter, Either".

Since then, I've not worked on it anymore, but I do think something like hRelease would be good, as it would permit people to clearly round up the 'official' company responses to things and make them a part of larger discussions. The ails that plague press releases have nothing to do with slapping a Technorati link on them.

[Brian Solis]

Stowe, there isn't any lamenting or mercy coming from this PR blogger. I've been pretty frank with the need to improve things at every level in PR, not just writing, and have gone to great lengths to help those who feel there's an opportunity to improve.

It all starts with the need to tell a better story to people in a way that means something to someone. One release no longer serves everyone. With wire services placing them in search engines as well as news desks, it's now more important than ever, to improve the foundation. Journalists aren’t the only reader of releases these days; they're now actively consumed by customers as well. 51% of IT professionals reported that they learned about new technology by reading releases on Yahoo over tech publications.

It's the substance and honesty that press releases lack. The rest is technology.

The description of the SMR aka hrelease aka Social Media Release (preferably called New Media Release) is a bit off. The idea is to strip out all of the bullshit and hype from traditional, useless press releases and rebuild it as a focused compilation of facts, links, and media to help busy bloggers and journalists write a story (without having to sort through a sea of crap to find out what's real, what's canned, and what's relevant.) This is what a good release should be anyway, regardless of fancy titles.

Last night you asked a great question, "Why not use blogs?" I did answer that with an "AMEN!" In addition to providing writers with a better source for writing their stories, blogs are a natural way to also start conversations (eliminating the robotic process of companies talking “at” markets).

I'm Johnny Cash baby, walking the line and catching the train.

[Chris Heuer]

Stowe, as you pointed out, we were there to talk about the social media release, we were not on a mission last night to explain what social media is or isn't. This was about revising the entire way the PR profession looks at press releases. The issues you raise are good ones, and other than the combative approach you want to take, are generally things we agree with.

If you had done a bit more research you would understand that the term social media release is the presentation layer, and that the concept we are supporting technically is the hRelease. The reason behind supporting Microformats are many, but the simplest is that it is intended to primarily be distributed through RSS on BLOGS!

The interesting thing about proposing a Microformat for it is the structuring of the information in the press release to make it more findable, which both Brian's previous comments hints at. Additionally, I believe it is a way to distinguish everyday blog posts, from official corporate announcements, such as those that accompany a product launch, and to bundle all the facts/information in a way that will let other people tell the story - whether journalists, bloggers, raving fan customers or haters.

For you to harp on us for the one ot two uses of the word audience is not fair nor accurate and quite honestly feels more like an attempt to nitpick for the purpose of creating controversy. As you may have done in the past when selling an idea to a group of people, you use language they understand in order to make the connection. It is the equivalent of a software developer saying users instead of people - this is habitualized usage of language. While your main point is correct, that companies need to engage with people through social media, the occasional use of the term audience is not inappropriate.

We all appreciated your insightful and challenging questions, as that is the sort of dialogue we want to have with a wider group of people. Our understanding of social media and our moral compass is clear here, that companies ultimately need to let go of the illusion of control, be more transparent and most importantly, be honest and engage with their customers and all the people who care about what a company is doing with respect.

[Shannon Whitley]

Excellent comments. I'm totally with you on using blogs to post releases. The technology for two-way communications is already there. Just use it.

I've seen people state over-and-over that the writing needs to improve, but few people are stepping up to say how everyone can get there. Where's that conversation?

[Shel Holtz]

Ditto Brian.

This is about making corporate announcements more accessible and usable by those who are participating in the social media space and allowing organizations to be more conversational in their communications (through comments and trackbacks, as an example). As a journalist employing a blog as his platform, Tom Foremski not only understands this, but called for it.

But I still think the "just use blogs" notion fails to appreciate the real-world work of journalists, SEC disclosure requirements, and the ability for anybody to parse out official corporate announcements from the universe of blog chatter. (Robert Scoble fell into an issue a few months back (when he was still at Microsoft), for example, when he spoke on "behalf" of the organization on his blog, but then had to admit he wasn't the authoritative voice of the organization on that particular issue.) The world of corporations -- regulated by law -- is just simply more complex than "just blog it." And you won't find a more passionate advocate of social media than me!

It would be worth reading the SMR blog(www.socialmediarelease.org) and perhaps even listening to the dozen or so NMRCasts -- getting the context of a lot of thoughtful and meaningful work that has been done to date -- in order to arrive at a reasoned judgement.

And frankly, I think labels are just that. I don't really give a crap if it's called a social media release, a new media release, a press release, a news release, an official blog post, a corporate position, or Ned. As long as it does the job.

[Tom Foremski]

I've never been a fan of the term "social" in this context and I've written about it many times. However, it is becoming more commonly used and its meaning is changing to something else, especialy in the PR community. That's OK.
Not sure what nudge wink winks you refer to. The CEO quotes are things they say all the time, they are usually meaningless but nevertheless, they are real.
The new media release, as we refer to it, has the potential to make PR and media more honest because the source of each word, sentence can be tracked. And various metrics can be applied depending on outcome intended.
And as for "audience" it is a commonly used term that is OK. Sometimes we (people) are acting as an audience, sometimes we are in conversation, I don't think there is anythng sinister or negative about the word...

[Chris Saad]

Maybe Social Media is not dead then hey Stowe? :)

Manual Trackback:
http://www.touchstonelive.com/blog/2007/01/follow-up-social-media-is-dead-or-not.html

[Jeremiah Owyang]

I've been scratching my head over the Social Media Press release too:

http://tinyurl.com/25sbke

I don't have a PR background, and was trying to figure out how it helps communication. Frankly, I probably don't know enough in this arena, so I'm anxiously waiting for this to get sorted out.

[Jay Rosen]

Dead on, Stowe. Thanks for writing it. Part of the problem is the idea of "message" too. The message comes first, the people second, in corporate speak.

[tara hunt]

Stowe, this rocks. I wasn't there because when I go to these things, I inevitably leave upset.

In fact, even the term "social media" makes me want to cry. WTF is social media? People are social and we aren't just idly waiting here to have really impersonal, crappy PR messages stuffed down our throats.

Damn, I promised myself I would just ignore this inane sector of the world and wait for it to eventually die off, but as long as we put money before people, the disrespect will continue.

We need to have that dinner soon so we can drink too much wine and rant and write the drunken manifesto. ;)

T

[Chris Messina]

I have to say that I agree Stowe, but that you might be preaching to a bunch of dinosaurs basking in the tar pits on the eve of the next ice age.

The problem is not with starting with "better stories" -- it actually starts with a genuine and fundamental respect for, as Stowe called them, "people". Unless you can achieve that, and I'm not sure it's even possible at a corporate level, you're going to have a hard time "inventing" better stories to tell "us".

The problem with the SMR (which sounds more like AK-47 than it should) is that it still pushes information in "blips of transparency" that you expect people to somehow care more about than their friends, who are pushing similar, yet ongoing and consistent "blips of transparency" that, over time, have resulted in genuine relationships forming. You can't expect drive-by honesty to replace decades of abuse and indirection.

Instead you've gotta start from the bottom, just as us edglings all have, and earn your way into our feed readers and Google Alerts, just as others who have come before you, and with whom we've established lasting ties, have. If you expect to do any less work on your way to redemption, well, you might as well take one more good roll in that thar tar pit and fade gracefully into the night.

[tmandel]

You knocked it out of the park, Stowe. But at the same time I think you miss one perspective.

The voicelessness of the traditional press release is a 'feature'. A press release basically asserts a 'fact' ("Crips and big pharma sign new 'blood thicker than water' accord") and provides narrative and interpretive context around it. The context is meant to communicate the issuer's *claim* as to the significance of the 'fact' or 'event'. That's why it's ok to have quotes that aren't really quoting any actual human being's actual speech. Truth's not on display, a claim is.

The problem with adding a 'voice' to this highly stylized format is that it would imply the ability to *debate* the significance of the claims made in the release. A press release should be thought of as a kind of reverse of a funeral eulogy. We all know that *no one* ever lived up to their eulogy! All the same, we don't want someone in the audience to stand up and say 'wait a minute, he wasn't really such a great father and husband....' That happens in another context. Ditto w/ the press release.

Not everything is a candidate for a 'social media' version.

[Rick Calvert]

I love New Media about as much as anyone but I don't see why companies should abandon traditional press releases.

Send out traditional press releases to the traditional press who for the most part don't get blogs, or podcasts, or any other type of new media.

As for just posting on your company blog I guess that is ok for big companies who have traditional journalists monitoring their every word but if you are a small company and just post all of your news on your blog it is going to make all the noise of a tree falling in the forest with no one around to hear it.

Little companies at least good ones should use press releases, blogs, podcasts, wikis and whatever means they can get their hands on to tell the world about their stuff.

If it's good then the world will applaud it and hopefully buy it. If it's crap then the world will respond accordingly.

[Alexander M Zoltai]

Had to track your ideas back from "Beyond the Beyond" and glad I discovered the SourceBlog.
Really appreciate your ideas, especially since I'm entering the blogosphere for the second time in my life, with much more earnestness of commitment and a bit more TechSavvy (still don't quite get TrackBacks, but...)
It's looking like HyperText is evolving into HyperComm and I'm glad I'm along for the ride

~ Alex

[jeneane]

the most social press release is a phone call from someone I respect.

[Chris Hooley]

That recap was pretty gangsta, but all too true. A blog or a forum that pushes corporate babble is not a blog or a forum. It's a flog and people hate that. Completely misses the point.

[John Dodds]

PR incumbents may disagree, but I've always seen their business as discrete where blogs are continuous. The parallel in real social life seems obvious to be. Namely, one is always going to be more amenable to the acquaintance who nods or smiles at you whenever you're around than one is to the acquaintance who only rushes over to engage you when they have something to say about themself.

[Amanda Chapel]

Stowe,

PR getting social media wrong... there's a funny little irony there. Apparently, there's a limit to what nonsense even goofballs can swallow.

CRITICAL FLAW #1: "A Social media is based on the dynamic of a many-to-many dialogue between people. Yes, people: that's the word that should have been used. Not audience."

No. A corporation will NEVER be able to afford one-off relationships, let alone conversations. Stowe, you are proposing a hugely expensive cost for undetermined return.

Now don't be cute and say, "well you won't be able not to." You're wrong. Birds of a feather flock together. Shotguns work best.

CRITICAL FLAW #2: "Companies don't blog, or converse: people do."

Correct, BUT... a company is one entity under the law, not many. Companies speak as one. This is basic business dynamics. You might find that false; but a company by definition is a legal lie. Unless you plan to change that, which is totally ludicrous, you're pissing against the wind.

CRITICAL FLAW #3: Quoting Doc Searls to make a business case. C'mon. That's just silly.

LISTEN: Writing the company's story, reporting the organizations facts, articulating a position, etc., ALL are NOT things any mature responsible sensible and employed corporate exec would EVER vet with the unruly amorphous populace mass. PERIOD. And to those knuckleheads that say "but, but"... fact is the benefits of all this social nonsense is the stuff of fad and myth.

Lastly, the only reason this social crap has any support from PR is because a small group have glommed onto it as the new new thing and the cornerstone of their lightweight expertise. They look sillier every day.

- Amanda Chapel

[bluebonics]

thanks for pointing out all the reasons why blogging isn't journalism. sure, there are downfalls for "traditional media" but there are plenty of downfalls for this "social media" crap as well... :P

[Doug Haslam]

Good heavens-- shoot me immediately if I pitch a blogger or any other media person with just a press release. If I think you might like to write about something, I'll send you a personal note/call/comment.

Press releases have their own jobs to do-- disclosure, reference, etc.-- but pitching journalists and bloggers and other media folks is not one of them

[Michael Clendenin]

Here, here, Amanda. Let's not forget, folks, that the news release is used to attract media attention (I'd have to disagree with Doug on this point). Small outlets without resources might use the release material verbatim, but most news outlets taking an interest will prefer to conduct their own interviews garnering their own info to quote. But the release is the company's vetted, hopefully accurate line and it's up to PR folks and executives in subsequent interactions with the media to stick to the vetted messaging. (While we're at it, "press" refers solely to the print medium and we all know the release is often used effectively to attract broadcast media attention, so let's agree to use "news release" which lends itself to considering changing formats based on the targeted medium).

[Jon Husband]

Press releases are press releases .. we just have more forms of "press" to use now, including "press" the phone buttons as Jeneane pointed out ... and they have varying degrees of sociality attached to the way(s) in which they are disseminated.

The more important aspect, imo, is the degree to which PR is not spin, and that's where blogging dynamics come in. Many-to-many does change the the means by which the degree of spin (or non-spin) can be assessed by those who receive / read the PR.

[Anon Ymous]

Bring on the revolution! Lets all get out our best tie-die shirts, bongo drums and laptops and head for the hills to get some guerilla blog warfare going against the evil consumer corporations man...

You talk the talk about open communication for someone who walks the walk of moderating the comments published against your rants.

[Nick Wreden]

I agree with the post, but think you missed examining one key issue: "WHY do companies keep speaking to 'audiences' with corporatespeak CEO quotes?" One reason is that many of these adherents believe in the 30 year old theory of "positioning" -- aka, telling prospects/customers about what to think about you. Today, as so many of the responses noted in one way or another, brands are customer-driven. Not only do customers make companies more responsive to their requirements, but they define the brands, based on economic, emotional or experiential value. The sooner that companies move away from the mass-media relic of "positioning," and adopt and adapt to collective, interactive media like SMRs, the more likely they are to successfully and profitability engage customers.

[Causes of Depression]

Great post! Thanks