I clearly created quite a firestorm earlier this week when I blogged that I don’t think people should be paid to tweet about a brand. While I think a good number of commenters agreed with me, I think what caused the true firestorm is that I used the recent Land Rover campaign as my example.

After keeping an open mind and reading all of the comments about the post (see it here), I still don’t think people should be PAID to tweet or blog about brands…and now the FTC agrees.

An article in yesterday’s Wall Street Journal described the Internet as “becoming so rife with paid blogging that the Federal Trade Commission, which guards against false advertisements, is examining whether it should police bloggers. As it updates nearly 30-year-old advertising guidelines, the FTC is proposing that bloggers, and online marketers and companies that compensate them, be held liable for misleading claims.”

The article is fair and balanced – talking to bloggers both who are paid and those who are not, but also to those that are paid who do and don’t disclose they’re paid.

What bothers me is those that disclose they are paid, but then don’t write anything negative or critical about the products they do review: “In a disclosure at the bottom of her Web page, Ms. Smith notifies readers that she accepts compensation for blog posts, but says, “We always give our honest opinions.” Still, in an interview, Ms. Smith said she never writes anything negative about products she is asked to review because, “I choose not to be critical.”

This is akin to the beginning of my career when a magazine would give you an advertorial if you bought ad space. The advertorial was great for companies because it was viewed as editorial written by the staff at the publication. But very quickly you began seeing PAID ADVERTORIAL at the top of the pieces because the FTC didn’t want the public confused.

Same idea, different decade.  Things are changing rapidly and we have to know what is ethical, what is not ethical, and what dips over the line.  Let’s not spin; rather be ethical about what it is that we’re doing. It only helps in the longrun.

With all of today’s news, it was hard to decide on just one topic for today… address the latest on how Domino’s reacted to those gross videos posted online? Overdone by now. Comment on Pizza Hut’s latest announcement looking for a summer intern to run their Twitter? Yawn. Ponder how Freddie Mac will react publicly to their CEO’s suicide?  Too distressing.

Continue Reading »

Isn’t that the old adage? The shoemakers children don’t have shoes?  That’s what I think of when I read the Feb. 10 review of “PR: A Persuasive Industry” in USA Today.

The article starts out with this…

Sleazy. Disingenuous. These are words used in U.K. newspaper coverage of the public relations industry. PR, oddly enough, doesn’t have great PR. People tend to think that PR involves being manipulative and saying whatever is in the employer’s best interests.

Gee. Allow me to keep reading.

(The authors) call PR an amoral industry, a tool for good or evil purposes. There was, alas, Hitler, Goebbels, and the Nazi propaganda machine.

More? Why make my face more red that it is right now? Stop reading!  I can’t…it’s like a traffic accident. Must…keep…reading.

I’ve not read this book, but the reviewer goes on to say that in the book the authors debate whether or not it is the role of a PR professional to tell the truth.

I am here to tell you that every journalist (both traditional and new) I’ve ever worked with would tell me where to stick it if I ever lied to them.  If a client asked us to lie (and it has happened), we immediately resign the business.

I’m also here to tell you that PR professionals live by a Code of Ethics and I’ve seen people kicked out of industry organizations for displaying anything but professionalism. So there are good and bad in every profession. Until you walk a day (or five) in our shoes, let’s leave the negativeness and bashing alone.

It makes me sad that Chicago has lost a few great boutique PR firms in the past 12 months.  But it’s hard to sympathize when there is spin surrounding the closing of a shop.

On Sept. 11, 2008, Crain’s Chicago Business reported that Lannon Communications was “closing its office and laying off staff while it restructures from the economy’s thumping of the retail industry.”  This made me very sad…and a little nervous when I read it last fall.

Yesterday the Chicago Sun-Times reported Lannon “shuttered her firm to become vice president of strategic partnerships for Merchandise Mart Properties.”

Let’s say she did have the job in the works with Merchandise Mart (who was a Lannon client) and that yesterday’s news is true.  That makes the news in September from Crain’s seem like someone, somewhere, wasn’t being very strategic in releasing that information.  But perception is reality and this is perceived by me as spin.

What do you think?

My friend Eric Seidel is a professional media trainer who has worked both on the media side and the client side.  He has Fortune 100 experience and works with top executives.

He recently wrote a blog post called, “Get ‘spin’ out of your lexicon.” He goes on to say it’s bad for your business health because “reporters know when you’re spinning and they use it as motivation to really dig in their heels and come after you.”  Check out the post – it has a great case study via video about Jet Blue.

But this isn’t just for clients.  Yes, it’s our job to teach our clients how to work with the media, but it is not our job to teach them how to spin, lie, or evade the media.  Our job is not to spin.  Our job is to help our clients communicate with their customers via the media by being honest, open, and transparent.

Let’s do our jobs.

We have a running game with our out-of-state friends; we stop at every Mexican place that says, “The world’s {insert adjective} margaritas!”  In Chicago, that’s quite a game as you only have to get in a cab and drive up and down Lincoln before you’ve had a few too many.

My good friend Martin Waxman last week blogged about this very topic, but in terms of sweepstakes.  You know that letter you receive that says, “The fact that you are now in possession of enclosed documents that are proof of your chance of becoming a prize winner is all but confirmed.”

There are many instances of this in our lives and some advertisers have been sued over extraneous words that can’t be proven (most know my favorite is “The Funnest iPod Ever”, mostly because “funnest” isn’t a word).  But this is spin in it’s finest flair.

Martin is right; the excellent PR professionals will stop this practice through social media and honest and transparent communication and it will eventually trickle to the rest of our lives.  Well, one can hope!

There is an old saying that a dog is a man’s best friend. Well President Bush’s “best friend,” a Scottish terrier named Barney, obviously wasn’t named after the fun-loving, purple dinosaur. During Barney’s morning walk Thursday, Reuters reporter Jon Decker made an attempt to pet Barney, who was having none of it and bit Decker’s right index finger drawing blood and medical attention.

Continue Reading »

Over the past couple years posting on FADS I have come to find that spin can appear in all shapes and sizes.  Spin doesn’t hate against color or race or religion or class.  But how do you spot spin?  The real question is; how do you know when you’re being spun? 

Continue Reading »

News organizations often prepare stories in anticipation of something occurring so they can be the first to leak breaking news. Well, the Los Angeles Times made a premature mistake by going live and announcing that Barack Obama actually chose Hillary Clinton to be his vice presidential candidate along with Bill Richardson, Kathleen Sebelius, and four other Democrats. While you cannot blame the Los Angeles Times for their preparations, this is not the only time Obama was misperceived through the media. John McCain tried a couple different stunts that backfired on him when he related Obama to Paris Hilton — who would have thought?

Continue Reading »

Well, Paris Hilton took part in another video, but this time her video is rated “E” for educational. Hilton’s video on superstar comedian, Will Farrell’s Funny or Die Web site was a response to one of John McCain’s negative public relations stunts of comparing his rival, Barack Obama, to celebrities Paris Hilton and Britney Spears. McCain is taking the approach of bringing out the negativity in his counterpart, rather than focusing on the important facts; war, oil, economy, or the over so popular term “change.” McCain is reaching an all time low, spinning Obama’s image and comparing him to the queen of party girls. McCain are you getting a little worried?

Continue Reading »