Michael Arrington has some points in that some big companies (like Google) have finally succumbed to no-embargo news, but to declare embargoes dead on TechCrunch is to declare them dead– well, on TechCrunch. They will live on in other places, PR folks.
Oh- and if you have to periodically keep declaring embargoes dead, maybe they’re really zombies. Hire Woody Harrelson to finish the job.
A heartfelt congratulations to Laura Fitton for launching oneforty.com, fittingly positioned as the app store for Twitter. It’s great to see friends do well, and I have been rooting for Laura forever (ok, about two years or so). Please consider my extreme bias when I tell you that oneforty.com is the best Web site. Ever. (end of review)
(EDIT: Of course, Laura has a whole team behind her now that deserves a ton of credit- bad of me not to mention that in first draft))
B.L. frequently comes out with great numbered lists (like “10 Reasons to Blog/Not to Blog”, etc.), and this is no exception. You must read the post to get all the reasoning, but here are the six reasons, with my comments:
- Employees will waste time with social media. Or, they’ll network and communicate, adding value. You’re a smart manager, you can separate the wheat from the chaff.
- Haters will damage our brand. Yes, they do it everywhere. The ones at social media are easier to find, confront and convert (where appropriate and possible).
- We’ll lose control of the brand. I differ from B.L.’s statement that message control is an illusion, but– you really lose control if you don’t participate.
- Social media requires a real budget! It’s not really cheap, or free. It’s pretty cheap to experiment. And anyway, why should you have a “social media” budget? Bake it into your departments, and costs are shared among marketing, sales, IT, etc- whoever touches it– which should be most of the company, like it or not.
- They’re scared they’ll be sued. If you’re stupid enough to get sued in social media, you’re stupid enough to get sued anyway. Social media isn’t the problem.
- They’re scared of giving away corporate secrets or that information on social networks will affect the stock price. See above about participating. Misinformation spreads more freely without you.
Why is the “bank’s HR department is scrambling to come up with a solution?” (according to the NY Post). Did they not plan for this? Did it all of a sudden dawn on the bank that that maybe big payouts will be a PR problem? Gah! Surely it’s not that simple.
I have been hearing lately about iPhone apps that, knowing where you are in a city, overlap the maps with pertinent information about what’s inside buildings, etc (hey, there’s a Starbucks in that mall! How would I ever have found it without my app? But I kid…). Is it too morbid to suggest a pool on the day the first person gets hits by a bus because their nose is buried in thee Augmented iPhone screen? Gosh, I sound like an old fart.