The Intersection of Online and Offline

I hear a lot, both in the online and offline environments, terms that confuse the fundamental role of public relations with other similar communications functions.  Terms like “marketing public relations” certainly does not help clear up any of the confusion.

In my mind, to be a good public relations practitioner, you have to understand the fundamentals of what you are doing.  You are not shoveling information down people’s throats, or probing their subconsciousness in an attempt to get them to buy that new Mercedes.  If you are blasting our press releases by the thousands, you are not practicing good public relations.  Really.

My three favorite definitions of public relations come from:

• Cutlip, Center and Broom (text): “Public relations is the management function that establishes and maintains mutually beneficial relationships between an organization and the publics on whom its success or failure depends.”
• Webster’s – “The art and science of developing reciprocal understanding and goodwill.”
• Public Relations News – “Public relations is the management function which evaluates public attitudes, identifies the policies and procedures of an individual or an organization with the public interest and plans and executes a program of action to earn public understanding and acceptance.”

There’s a lot to like in these definitions like “publics upon whom its success of failure depends,” “reciprocal understanding and goodwill,” and I really like the last one that classifies public relations as a management function.

What is common in all of these is the two-way nature of the relationship.  Sure, you might be talking, but you damn sure should be listening as well.  Think about the companies that have depended upon us for the societal license to operate (tobacco companies, chemical companies), that, due to public pressure, have changed the fundamental way that they do business.  So the important part of either online or offline public relations is the reciprocity:  if you are not talking to the your publics — and listening — and responding or acting — you are not doing it right.

P.S. - Just to stir the pot a little, I have listed a group of associated items that public relations, — in its purest definition –  IS NOT.   Feel free to comment early and often.

• Marketing
• Lobbying
• Spin
• Advertorials
• Publicity

Mark

I wrote an article for Media Bullseye this week about how Google, Apple and Microsoft are screwing up, but what I don’t write are the article teasers.  I love this one:

While Apple, Microsoft, and Google have recently announced new and/or improved versions of software, Mark Story has become increasingly irritated at the amount of mandatory software that is being foisted upon an unwilling public–by the very companies that should know a lot better.

“Increasingly irritated.”  My life story.

Mark

When your party summons you, you answer the call of destiny.  So who am I to say no?

Click on the image below.

Mark

In a moment that was likely based on blogger hubris and too much caffeine, a few weeks ago, I blogged about an MSNBC piece on social media overload and called it “sloppy journalism.”

The point that I was attempting to make in the post is that there are enough tools and aggregators out there to eliminate social media overload.  FriendFeed and other tools can put it all in one place.  Almost as soon as I wrote it, some regular readers chimed in and politely took me to task;  the article was note written for propeller-heads such as myself, but for people for whom social media may indeed create overload.

Among the initial comments were:

• Jonathan Trenn said: You’re an online strategist, a PR pro, a social media practitioner. Being networked on all these sites is in your professional blood. In addition, you likely feel somewhat required to take part in all of these networks because it’s tied into what you do for a living.  She’s likely writing that piece for a lot of the working professionals who are getting all sorts of information on this network, on that service, etc.
• Jenn Zingsheim said: I agree that this seems to be sensationalist journalism, but Jonathan has a really great point. I find that when I’m talking about what I do to friends & family, they get quickly lost when I’m describing all the different networks. They like to package things neatly into boxes (”…ok, so Flickr does photos, LinkedIn is professional, Facebook is college…what? It’s not just college? and you have professional connections there too?…I thought that’s what LinkedIn was for…” etc.)

And then, yesterday, the author of the original article, Eve Tahmincioglu wrote a polite and measured response to my posting which was critical of her piece (which I am listing in its entirety):

• Hey Mark,

  I don’t enjoy being called sloppy but I’m open to any criticism if I can learn from it and get better at what I do. I’m not sure your criticism here really helped me out but I’d be interested in hearing more.

  It’s great to hear you’re able to keep up with so many social networking sites, but alas, not everyone can, aggregators or not.

  I have gotten tons of emails from people who believe they need to have hundreds of friends on every site out there and the thought of it is driving them crazy. The bottom line is they don’t.

  Because of what we do we have to luxury to play around with all these new great sites, but there are many professionals out there scrambling to keep their jobs or find new ones that don’t.

  If I had time, I would definitely attend the Blog Expo, being I’m a blogger myself. I would have stopped by to say hello.

  And by the way, my name is pronounced, tach-min-gio-lou.

  Best,
  Eve

Just like the old saying goes, if one man calls you a jackass, pay no attention.  If three people call you a jackass, buy a saddle.  So I am going saddle shopping later today.

I’ll say publicly what I posted in the comment thread and what I emailed:  my post was a cheap shot and Eve responded politely and without rancor.  And the fact is that Eve, Jonathan and Jenn were right:  it’s easy for me to dismiss social media overload because I live in a different world.  Given time to think about it, my response is akin to my accountant saying to me, “There’s no such thing as difficulties in doing your taxes because Microsoft Excel is so easy to use.”

I was wrong, period, and am eating a big crow sandwich.  After I researched Eve a little, I discovered that she has her own blog, has published a book, and is well-thought of enough to have column on MSNBC and is clearly somewhat of an expert in the career field.

And to top it all off, when subject of a pithy post, Eve is unfailingly polite.

So where I come from, when you’re wrong, you apologize. Sorry, Eve.

Mark

For all of Georgetown students, below is a sneak peak at this Wednesday night’s lecture.

See everyone at 7:40 in Walsh.

Mark