Make this my home page
More buttons
Best of the Day
Page
Turn off that Wi-Fi network - it's disturbing our chakras.
Video

Hot For Words: Lollipop

Blog
Innocent Spam
Game
EA SPORTS Complex on PlayStation Home
Art
Kinetic sculpture is a cross between art and engineering.
Cool tools
Hot links
Dadaist deconstruction of new media, as a flash game.
Everything you need to know about microscopic water bears
News for nerds
For lovers of the Green Fairy
Stories and art from Australia's Yolgnu people
Australia's best science fiction author
Did the earth just move?
Don't discount journalism
Novelist and comic book legend's homepage
Searchable history of the internet
Exposing systematic torture in Iran
Museum of science fiction, utopia and extraordinary journeys
The real story of christianity
Image bookmarking
Developing tech to get the internet to its full potential
Is Social Media Killing PR?

Is Social Media Killing PR?

Susan from Yaybia! writes about the trouble with social networks and the belief that they can replace real PR.

Nothing has quite fired me up more than when I checked my Google Reader the other day, only to find that in my "MediaBistro: PRNewser" feed was an article with this offending question "Do We Need PR Anymore Now That We Have Social Media?" If I wasn't going to sound crazy at work in my little cubicle, I probably would have jumped up and yelled, "UM, YES?????"

I calmed myself a little bit when I realized that the article was sparked from a panel discussion called "Is Social Media Killing PR?" which recently took place at The Horn Group to address the issue of social media and PR's relationship.

The event was inspired by the growing number of blogs questioning the necessity of PR in this time of a social media boom. As the Horn Group described the event in an online invitation:

"Jason Calacanis thinks you should fire your PR agency. Robert Scoble thinks you should ignore it. Michael Arrington says PR is "broken." Jeremiah Owyang sees value in it, but has challenged PR people and their critics "to engage in a head on discussion"."

Possibly feeling the same sense of fiery objection that I did, Girls in Tech and The Horn Group got together, gathered a panel, and decided to tackle this issue head on against critics of PR and with advocates of the profession (you can catch a liveblog of the event HERE).

A great point brought up is the fact that social media is a TOOL. Public relations is so much more than that. In public relations, we use every communication tool at our disposal to get a message out to the public. We have strategy, we have tactics, and we have contacts that ordinary people may not have the access to.

There is one way I feel that social media could threaten public relations: if as professionals, we ignore its importance as a tool and do not make the effort to learn how to use it in the right way. Already though, agencies are working to understand the growing medium to its fullest.

Padilla Speer Beardsley, for instance, has created a team of social media experts within the agency called the SMERF team (Social Media Elite Response Force). The team holds frequent meetings to share new social media findings, and to educate those in the agency who wish to learn more about different types of social media. In the crunch of a new client pitch, the team can be called upon to generate ideas and help others understand the medium. In December, the group plans to hold a Social Media Boot Camp, so that all who wish to become proficient with this tool, can. (I get to give a speech about Twitter.... I love my job).

If agencies keep up to date on this medium, then I see no reason why we can not coexist peacefully, despite the grumblings of Jason Calacanis and others. Social media is another tool for strategic communications to use to spread a message. In the end, what really matters is that you have a good message that people are willing to listen to and take seriously. Kara Swisher of the Wall Street Journal's "All Things D" said it best at the end of the panel discussion:

"What's important is that you're representing a company that genuinely has a good product. You cannot (do) PR (on) a crappy product and it doesn't matter how many press releases you get on a website. All that really matters is that you have a really good product. I don't remember the last time I picked up the phone and went ‘Oh my God, it's a communication tool...' Focus on the product!"

View the pageGo back to previous pageLeave some feedbackPrint this pageEmail link to friendsBookmark in del.icio.usAdd to Stumble ThisAdd to your favourite bookmarksDigg this article

Tags

 

Related Stories

   
Next

So, I read today that the designer of Mattel's Barbie doll was obsessed with sex. Seriously? We need a book-length study to tell us that?

We in the land of feminist academics have been teaching the pernicious sexual politics of Barbie for years. The breasts that defy gravity, the hair, the long, long legs and of course the cruel, nipped in waist. Oh, don't forget the tiny clothes, the f*ck-me pumps, not to mention the well-equipped kitchens in every Barbie Dream House. The message of Barbie seems unambiguous to me.

Still, many students (and not a few colleagues) consistently resist seeing Barbie as a miniature sex toy, claiming instead that the doll was a good role model for little girls. (One could, after all, purchase a Barbie doll dressed as a doctor.) Or claiming, equally untenably, that toys had no impact on their ideas about gender roles or their own sexuality.

These students, mostly women, want to rescue Barbie, to protect their own childhoods from academic interrogations of pop culture and what those interrogations might reveal. That's understandable. Yet, many of these same students sit in my class pouring out of tank tops, squeezed into low-rise jeans, or tugging on mini-skirts so short they are nearly impossible to sit down in. That is, dressed like Barbie.

It's an experience I regularly have as a feminist critic of popular culture: a media event, book or news story demonstrates that I'm not wrong, my ideology is not based in "over analyzing," "hyper sensitivity," or "reading too much into things" (the three most common criticisms feminists tend to encounter). It's disappointing, frankly, to stumble so often upon evidence of society's sexism and to keep having to explain that it's there. Disappointing that Barbie was so obviously a sexed-up, misogynist, bad idea for little girls and to realize how thoroughly our culture embraced the toy anyway.

So, here we are again. Feminists were right: no one but a sex-obsessed man with a perverse idea of female anatomy would create a female toy like Barbie. And, as is too too often the case for feminists, being right isn't something to celebrate.

Dr. Bean is an Associate Professor of English at Marshall University, specializing in Gender Studies, Film and Drama. She is the author of "Post-Backlash Feminism: Women and the Media Since Reagan/Bush" (McFarland & Co. 2007). She hosts a blog on mid-life and feminism at kelliebean.com.