There have been a lot of stupid things written about “the power of blogs.” But I think I just read the most ridiculous statement of all.
I found it in a new white paper written by Edelman PR and Intelliseek. It’s titled: “Talking from the inside out: The rise of the employee blogger,” and can be found at www.edelman.com.
Now, first I want to say that overall, this is an excellent white paper and worth reading. There is tons of good stuff in there about how companies can use internal blogs, and a great section on setting up blogging guidelines.
But the way the writers choose to lead the white paper is so overblown, so idiotic, that I almost didn’t even read it.
Here are the first two lines of the white paper:
“The rise of the blogosphere has the potential to empower employees in ways not unlike the rise of labor unions in the late 19th and 20th centuries. Although more subtle than those shifts in the labor-management dynamic, employee bloggers, in many cases, have tipped the balance of influence in their favor to establish levels of credibility that many CEOs can only dream of.”
Now, what do you suppose would make someone write something that silly? Why would someone try to compare the birth of labor unions—and the violence and bloodshed that went with that birth—to some employees tapping out little bloggie items on their lunch hour?
Why would someone compare an employee blogger to the CEO, in terms of having power and influence in the organization? Why would someone try to overstate the importance of blogs like that?
I think there are four possible answers to these questions. Take a look at them and decide which one you think it is:
1. Greed. The authors of the paper—Edelman PR and Intelliseek—both make more money the more popular blogs become. Edelman will help you set up an internal blogging program, and monitor external blogs for your organization. Same with Intelliseek, from what I could see on its web site.
In other words, is it any surprise that two organizations that stand to benefit big-time if blogs become really important are writing white papers saying that blogs are already really important?
2. Bad writing. The writers were looking for a dramatic way to bring readers into the paper . . . and they went too far. It wouldn’t be the first time a writer tried too hard for a dramatic lead and in doing so ruined the credibility of the rest of the story.
3. Ignorance of history. Maybe the paper was written by some 23-year-old junior staffer, who was busy building his own web site and text messaging his buddies when he was supposed to be studying history. Maybe he doesn’t know the history behind labor unions, and what workers went through in order to get them established.
4. They really believe it. This is the biggest stretch for me . . . because even if they believe that employees blogging will have the same effect on organizations that the blood-and-guts labor revolution did . . . do they really also believe part two of the opening statement—that employee bloggers have already gained influence that the CEO can “only dream of?” Maybe they do. Maybe they also believe in the Easter Bunny and the Tooth Fairy, too.
What do you think?
Comments (8)
People love a bandwagon. And history is littered with the "next big thing" that died on the vine. This is not to say blogs are doomed, only that I am not surprised to see such exaggeration and hype.
To answer your question:
Option 1: 75%
option 2: 25%
options 3 and 4: 0%
Neruda
Posted by S Neruda | October 20, 2005 11:14 AM
Posted on October 20, 2005 11:14
I'd bet heavily on Option 3, actually. It's not just 20-somethings. I'd be willing to bet most 30-somethings don't have a clue what the rise of labor unions was really about. Sad to say, but how many people in my generation (yes, I just dated myself) have any real understanding of what Jimmy Hoffa truly represents beyond a joke about stuff going missing, or really understand the pain of the early 1900s labor movement, or have even viewed On the Waterfront or Silkwood and *got* what the message was? Probably not many.
There's the additional consideration that -- cultural literacy being what it is -- most of the target audience of said whitepaper will not really get the incongruity of the comparison either. They said only "powerful movement," and that's precisely what 90% of their target readers will hear.
#1 and #2 are factors, but #3 is the reason for that particular gaffe, I think.
(By the way, I think you should write them a letter telling them how offended you are. ;) har!)
Posted by DeAnna B | October 20, 2005 1:54 PM
Posted on October 20, 2005 13:54
You forgot reason number six: Laziness. At some point, the writer was struck by the thought, "Garsh, labor unions used to have a buncha influence, and blogs do, air-go, blogs are like unions." And before thinking through it they mindlessly moved to the next paragraph, having conquered the daunting task of coming up with an opening. Laziness kills.
That said, I find it interesting that your default position is that blogs won't one day have "power and influence" approaching that of the CEO. Not in the way of daily decisions or direction -- but it's not hard for me to forsee the country's first CEO brought down by a blog. Picture: Joe CEO loses trust with employees. Blog lights up. SVPs notice. CEO calls communications on how to deal. Communications plants folks to influence. Blog notices, and REALLY lights up. Blog is shut down. Blog reopens on non-company sponsored site. Blog turns ugly. Board notices, loses confidence in CEO to turn it around. Customers notice. CEO gets notice.
I'll side with you that it's oversold, but I've seen distant CEOs who don't influence, while a few committed employees only lacked the right tools. Til now.
Posted by livnlrn | October 20, 2005 2:44 PM
Posted on October 20, 2005 14:44
How would truly anonymous employee blogging have affected Enron's leadership pre-crash? I agree with livnlrn; some CEO is going to come down because of employee blogging, and I wouldn't be surprised to see it happen within the next couple of years.
Anybody else see the Reporters Without Borders tools for dissident bloggers and think about how a disgruntled employee could use them too?
Posted by Allen | October 20, 2005 3:15 PM
Posted on October 20, 2005 15:15
I don't think blood and guts need to be involved to revolutionize something. I think blogs can and eventually will change the workplace environment, and potentially change the voice of the employee therein.
The problem with blogs is that for every one good, worthwhile blog, you have hundreds of senseless ramblings of people who have nothing constructive to say. Of course, during the rise of the labor unions, you had a similar thing...one strong-spirited intelligent person standing up and making sense and uniting the hundreds of people who couldn't figure out how to intelligently and productively make the changes themselves. Once that intelligent person starts talking and realizing they have a captive audience, the more influence they are bound to have with their peers, and could eventually threaten management comfort level.
While not as volatile, certainly, still not a horrible observation, albeit a little dramatic for my taste.
Posted by Rebecca | October 20, 2005 4:50 PM
Posted on October 20, 2005 16:50
It's another case of a gigantic PR consulting firm using the power of its brand name to conjure up fear in a market largely ignorant of history beyond the headlines and then position itself as the cowboy in the white hat riding in to save the day. And if it works, they'll do it again.
I read your companion piece in next week's Ragan Report, Steve (the sneak-peek available to subscribers) and thought it was interesting how you warned that soon EVERYBODY in a company is going to want a blog of their own. And that would be different from newsletters, brochures, etc., how? :-)
Posted by Robert J Holland, ABC | October 21, 2005 2:47 PM
Posted on October 21, 2005 14:47
Roberto:
It is different, my friend, because not everybody wants their own newsletter. And even if they did, unless they want to do all the printing and distributing themselves, they would have no way of getting it to anyone.
But with blogs, it's all so easy. Anyone can do one. Anyone with a computer can suddenly have a blog!!!
While I love the democratic, grass roots, power to the people element of this . . . the potential for even more information overload is a little scary.
Steve C.
Posted by Steve C. | October 26, 2005 1:28 PM
Posted on October 26, 2005 13:28
Admittedly, I am chronically a decade or so behind the times as far as most things are concerned, but there's only one blog that's worth the time and effort it takes to read it, and that's this one!
Of course, that number will double when I start doing my own!
Greg
Posted by Greg Marsh | October 26, 2005 3:46 PM
Posted on October 26, 2005 15:46