October 16th, 2006
Edelman Shows That Control Is Still More Important Than “Conversation”
Richard Edelman and Steve Rubel have final responded to the Wal-Mart flog incident with an appropriate mea culpa. They both insist that they could not respond to the storm of criticism sooner because they didn’t have all of the facts — and without all the facts, they couldn’t CONTROL the conversation. Both Richard and Steve took their lumps in the comments on their blog posts, and responded selectively to commenters.
I find it interesting that my post on this incident spent 12 hours at the top of TechMeme, got tons of traffic, with 20+ other blogs linking in, 30+ comments/trackbacks — by any reasonable measure a meaningful node in the “conversation.” Yet there was no attempt by anyone at Edelman to engage in conversation here. No comments. No emails. The only inbound communication I received was an email from Wal-Mart Watch about their post on the issue. That strikes me as a missed opportunity — not just with Publishing 2.0, but with every other blog that offered commentary. But more importantly, it shows just how hard REAL conversation is.
Real conversation would have mean engaging the issue BEFORE having CONTROL of all of the facts. It would have meant engaging each INDIVIDUAL blogger, not just broadcasting a single mea culpa post. But that’s a lot of HARD WORK.
So I actually don’t fault Edelman for not engaging in real conversation — there are shareholders, lawyers, and other loyalties that come before lofty notions of conversation. Steve himself said it best:
I work for a big company and my loyalties first and foremost are to Edelman. Sorry. I would give up this blog before I gave up working for them.
But I do blame Steve and Edelman for a lot of the hype around how easy this is all supposed to be. And I fault Steve for blithely criticizing other large corporations caught in similar tough positions. The thing about conversation is people have a way of remembering what you said — and let’s not forget that blogging is a permanent public record.
As I observed back when Steve was criticizing Dell’s corporate blogging efforts:
Dell could have been “brave†and taken on the tough issues right out of the gate.
But they chose not to. Why? Because they don’t “get it,†as their blogging critics suggest? Or is it because they are extremely cognizant of the risks inherent in a corporate entity, beholden to shareholders, creating a platform to talk to customers — many of whom are VERY unhappy?
If Edelman wasn’t cognizant of the risks, they sure are now.
Despite the risks, I don’t think that companies should be afraid of conversation — they really have no choice. As Edelman experienced, the conversation will take place with or without them. But they need to realize that it’s really, REALLY DIFFICULT to engage in conversation with the aim of achieving a desired outcome, especially when all isn’t right with the world.
What corporations should eschew is the hype around blog marketing, especially from PR/marketing companies that tell you how easy and fun it will be. Setting a blog is easy. And blogging can be fun. But trasparently stewarding a large corporate brand is never going to be a walk in the park.
Topics: Blogging | Blogs | Hype | Social Media
Powered by 
Design by 
Three Questions re: the Edelman/Wal-Mart Flap; The Wal Mart / Edelman Affair: Hardly a Crime…; más una interesante nota publicada por Business Week. Actualización: finalmente piden disculpas desde Edelman. Y en Publishing 2.0 y Denken Uber vuelven sobre el tema [IMG]
[…] with del.icio.us | Email this entry | TrackBack URI | Digg it | Track with co.mments | | Cosmos Click here forcopyright permissions! Copyright 2006 Mathew Ingram […]
[…] Scott Karp points out another interesting thing about this story: […]
Edelman Shows That Control Is Still More Important Than “Conversation†想è¦è£¸é«”，得自己把身體練好，ä¸ç„¶éš¨æ„訴諸人工整形，å°å¿ƒè¢«çˆ†æ–™XD marketingmarketing
Scott - “by any reasonable measure a meaningful node in the “conversation.†Yet there was no attempt by anyone at Edelman to engage in conversation here.” - You have delusions of significance :-).
I keep saying this, “conversation” is a sales-pitch used by the marketers to deceive targets of emotional manipulation into a false sense of power. In fact, they don’t like you, they even have contempt for you (generic “you”, not you personally).
Recursively, nobody cares what I say, and I’m shouting to the wind here
[…] Here are some more opinions on the subject: twopointouch (negative), Scott Karp (about corporate desire to control everything), and an interesting post about this situation’s effect on the blogosphere (when corporations want to apolgize, they contact Robert Scoble?!). […]
“there was no attempt by anyone at Edelman to engage in conversation here. No comments. No emails.”
Scott, you are dead right, it is really hard to carry on real conversations at the scale that Web 2.0 enables. But that’s the point of the technology: with each participant having blogs and linking to each other a scalable conversation can take place.
This is where the technology runs afoul of human nature: these types of conversations are unsatisfying at a certain point and on certain topics, and we want more direct contact. And we each want our own individual concerns/questions addressed. But there are only so many hours in the day…
Finding that balance point between personal conversation and the social conversation is a continuing challenge.
While one may question why it took so long, the apology post from Mr. Edelman is actually not bad. Imagine a world before blogs when apologies for lack of transparency could be avoided entirely. Saying mea culpa is never easy, but having said it usually means the lesson has been learned.
, and a few dozen other posts - IR Daily, twopointouch, Open (finds, minds …, hyku | blog, JD on EP, Marketing Begins At Home, Joe Duck, PR Squared, Scobleizer, The Post Money Value, Blog Business Summit, Message, Publishing 2.0 and A View from the Isle (links via Techmeme). Tags: communications, consulting, marketing, edelman, agencies, walmart, blogs
[…] Actualización: finalmente piden disculpas desde Edelman. Y en Publishing 2.0 y Denken Uber vuelven sobre el tema Para almacenar esta entrada en tu gestor de favoritos online, haz clic en el icono:Estos iconos te permitiran agregar este texto a tu gestor de favoritos online con solo hacer un clic. […]
What everybody seems to be missing in this whole thing is that a photojournalist–with 25 years in the profession–was working for a special interest and sold some of the photos he took while working for the special interest to the newspaper he worked for–which had a policy against its freelancers working for competiors or special interests.
Can you say “conflict of interest?”
Control of the message? how about one guy–Jim Thresher–trying to play both ends against the middle and make money from both the press and a special interest. Nobody’s latching on to this little tidbit and holding this guy responsible for a total breech of his ethics as a journalist…
or have we given up on the ideal that journalists have ethics??
As for companies learning to have conversation–first, throw all the very brilliant executives back into retail sales at a local mall for about a year. Make them wear the funny clothes that help the brand to market itself as a Lifestyle–then make them say the awkwardly worded little speeches that go along with new product launches. Let them make idiots out of themselves while they follow customers around trying to hawk the crap du jour while people brush them away like flies on a horse’s behind…
Then, take away all that crap and make them actually rely on their own personalities and the quality of the product to make the sales. Make them use the product first though. Then they’ll learn how to have conversation while marketing something they really like and use themselves.
You can’t know how to have real conversation if you’ve ceased practicing the art of real conversation. You can’t sell something well if you don’t know anything about what you’re selling. Let them master selling face to face in the real world–without charts, graphs, lifestyle clothing and packaged sales spiels–then let them go on the internet. If you can’t communicate with people in real life, there’s no way you’re going to be able to communicate well in the whacky little subculture that exists in the blogosphere. None of this is as easy as it looks.
just my $.02
it and the damage control being brought to bare by Edelman to save their pedistal in the blogosphere is enourmous. Enjoy. Links to some focal points as the conversation is going on everywhere. Scoble Marketing Roadmaps Publishing 2.0 and this one followed Technorati Tags: edelman, flap, pr, blogosphere, walmart
[…] Your browser does not support frames. Marktd uses frames to display news stories. Click Here to view this story. […]
[…] The whole Edelman Wal-Mart fake Blog Scandal just bugs me. | Blog This | E-mail This | Print This | Permanent Link […]
[…] Scott Karp with Publishing 2.0 focuses not what he calls “the Wal-Mart flog incident” (meaning fake blog) in his coverage of the story but rather a response to how the Edelman folks reacted to the story, pointing out that the blogosphere wants full disclosure, honesty, and more than just a carefully measured short comment. In short, as we’ve written about before, the interactivity of he Web has led to a shrinking distance between producer and consumer, and this transforms the way public relations is handled. […]
[…] I’ve been promoting “conversation over content” in recent presentations (content changes too rapidly to be the value point). I haven’t paid enough attention to the notion of control. Organizations are still largey consumed trying to control the message (and the conversation), and as a result, end up closing down avenues for real dialogue. Control more important than conversation: “Despite the risks, I don’t think that companies should be afraid of conversation — they really have no choice…the conversation will take place with or without them. But they need to realize that it’s really, REALLY DIFFICULT to engage in conversation with the aim of achieving a desired outcome, especially when all isn’t right with the world.” Posted by gsiemens at October 27, 2006 04:50 AM | TrackBack […]
[…] Wal-Mart’s PR firm, Edelman, is rocketing up the charts—all the way to # 1 on blog index Technorati’s top searches and tags. Guess what they’re talking about? Hint: it’s not organics, fashion or Lee Scott’s hybrid car. […]
[…] Edelman Shows That Control Is Still More Important Than “Conversation” […]
[…] For starters, the Edelman public relations firm, where RedState blogger Mike Krempasky works on the Wal-Mart account, is catching as much or more heat as the retail chain and was pressured into a belated apology. Potomac Flacks and Publishing 2.0 have more on that angle. […]
[…] Flogvertising: Edelman Gets A Kicking Fake blog? Walmart gets caught with its pants down Edelman Shows That Control Is Still More Important Than “Conversation” I don’t accept Edelman’s apology for the bogus Wal-Mart Blog… On Edelman and Wal-Mart Richard Edelman calls… Epilogue: Wal-Mart and Edelman Fake Walmart Blog Reuters opens virtual news bureau in ‘Second Life’ Does Second Life Need a Reuters Office? Friendster Gets Another Social Networking Patent Amazon in Second Life Mortiz Invests in the Crowded Celeb Gossip Field Sequoia Invests in Blog Network Sugar Publishing Sequoia reportedly invests in SF blog for women, Sugar Publishing Business2.Blogs (Yup, We’re About to Launch A Whole Bunch More) Paid popularity The Friendster Tell-All Story Learning from mistakes: Friendster, etc. The PayPal Mafia The ‘outing’ of Republican Senator Larry Craig Breaking: More Like "Fairy" Craig This Just In… Ohio Governor’s Race Becomes a Blow Out More on the Harry Reid Scandals: In California, Schwarzenegger Cruising […]