Do not be this guy
Every industry has bad actors, and the PR/Communications field is no exception. Lately there has been a lot of attention paid to folks using social media channels without disclosing their true identities or their affiliations. Cecilia Kang had a good piece in the Post recently on this topic.
Not only is this behavior shady, it’s actually counter-productive. Provided you can make a good case, you can be more persuasive and effective when you fully disclose who you — when using social media channels and in traditional PR activities. Things like Twitter and advocacy sites are newer channels, but the same rules of the road should apply. Be true, or risk creating problems when you are called out.
I can share a good example from early this week. Mike Causey is a long-time reporter on all things federal government, for the Post for many years and now for Federal News Radio 1500 AM. (You may also know him from his “Join NARFE Now!” ads on cable television, I love those.)
Anyway, I like Mike’s reporting but last Friday he wrote a piece on federal workers teleworking that I thought was a real stinker. The article was sarcastic and negative in tone, very surprising since I thought of Mike as an advocate for the federal workforce, and someone who I’m sure gets to telework himself. So I wrote an email and told him so, making my identity and my affiliation very clear (I support the Public Sector group of TANDBERG, the main supplier of video conferencing to government agencies and just purchased by Cisco).
To his credit, Mike got right back to me. And even better, he posted my comment in full in his Monday story focused on all the feedback he’s received. An old pro like Mike would never have done that if I wasn’t upfront about why I feel strongly on this issue. My email would have been tossed with the others sent by PR reps cloaked under the guise of “concerned readers.”
So what does non-disclosure look like? Well you can read via the link above how Cecilia Kang busts self-described “pop culture maven” PJ Rodriguez as a lobbyist for the cable industry. And one of my clients ran into a case of this recently as well. Neustar is the leading provider of managed DNS to hundreds of big name Internet brands and dozens of sovereign nations, so it regularly takes shots from smaller competitors.
Last week a DNS comparison site emerged, purporting to offer neutral comparison of competing company offerings. Sounds like a great concept, but unfortunately no information is provided about who is behind the site. Nor is there any contact information listed, beyond an anonymous comment box. And when you search for domain registration information, the identity of the registrant is cloaked. Hmm… why would anyone trust the expertise and impartiality of this web site?
Transparency is the coin of the realm in social media, and in any attempt at ethical persuasion. Engaging openly in the field of ideas as yourself is a win-win. It’s the right thing to do, and it’s the best way to represent your client.