PR Studies

Social media and PR

Earlier this week, I gave a lecture (via a wiki page) on social media that surprised some of our students. 'But you didn't only mention the internet'. No: mobile telephony has been the most pervasive communications technology of the last 20 years, and electronic media can be traced back to Reuters in the 1850s.

I mention this because it's sometimes hard even to give 'digital natives' a perspective on communications technology. Imagine helping the rather older members of the Chartered Institute of Public Relations to embrace the new. That's what the institute is attempting with its social media discussion paper published today (via PR Voice). It asks a very sensible series of questions relating to disclosure and transparency in the light of 'astroturfing', fake blogs, guidelines for employee blogs, ghost writing, wiki editing etc.

There are two competing forces at play here. On the one hand, a professional body needs to set exemplary standards and update these in the light of changing practice. On the other hand, workable ethical codes should be simple, memorable and comprehensive: they shouldn't need changing every week (think of medicine and the Hippocratic oath). I'll have to give some thought to my responses...

Comments

Social media and PR

Earlier this week, I gave a lecture (via a wiki page) on social media that surprised some of our students. 'But you didn't only mention the internet'. No: mobile telephony has been the most pervasive communications technology of the last 20 years, and electronic media can be traced back to Reuters in the 1850s.

I mention this because it's sometimes hard even to give 'digital natives' a perspective on communications technology. Imagine helping the rather older members of the Chartered Institute of Public Relations to embrace the new. That's what the institute is attempting with its social media discussion paper published today (via PR Voice). It asks a very sensible series of questions relating to disclosure and transparency in the light of 'astroturfing', fake blogs, guidelines for employee blogs, ghost writing, wiki editing etc.

There are two competing forces at play here. On the one hand, a professional body needs to set exemplary standards and update these in the light of changing practice. On the other hand, workable ethical codes should be simple, memorable and comprehensive: they shouldn't need changing every week (think of medicine and the Hippocratic oath). I'll have to give some thought to my responses...