« Half-truth business | Main | Open and shut case? »

Tuesday, February 05, 2008

One for all or all for one?

There's something personal and informal (conversational even) about a blog. That's why most bloggers are individuals. There's added value when the individual represents an organisation - but we still tune in to hear the individual's voice.

Corporate blogs don't make much sense. Whose voice are we listening to? If it's an anonymous copywriter, then there's something dishonest in the fiction. It it's a senior manager, then why not name names? There are ways to aggregate individuals into a group (like Hill & Knowlton's Collective Conversation), but in general corporate blogs don't excite.

Yet there's been postive commentary on a new Coca-Cola blog written by the company's archivist. MSc Marketing students who weren't too enthralled with my talk based on The Fall of Advertising and the Rise of PR might like to take a look at this. How does this blog support Coca-Cola's brand strategy?

Posted by Richard Bailey at 10:12 AM in Weblogs | Permalink

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d834205d1853ef00e5505e25c38833

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference One for all or all for one?:

Comments