Comments on: Is There Still a Place for Discretion? http://www.bivingsreport.com/2006/perils-of-pr-in-the-age-of-blogging/ The Bivings Report (TBR) is a source of news, insight, research and analysis on the web-based communications industry. TBR content is posted, created and managed by internet strategists, media/communications analysts, web developers, designers and programmers, all of whom are employees of The Bivings Group. Thu, 18 Mar 2010 02:41:03 -0400 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: Todd Defren http://www.bivingsreport.com/2006/perils-of-pr-in-the-age-of-blogging/comment-page-1/#comment-9627 Todd Defren Sat, 04 Nov 2006 02:22:13 +0000 http://www.bivingsreport.com/2006/perils-of-pr-in-the-age-of-blogging/#comment-9627 The only clarification that I'd make re: "there is more to the story" is that we are still Mothersclick's PR agency, and that that relationship was never in jeopardy. Mothersclick execs are very happy with the relationship and with the coverage they've received in other outlets. If anything, we were willing to let them go because their unwillingness to follow our counsel put our agency's reputation in jeopardy. And that, I'd suggest, is the key point. Let me make it again: by not only refusing our counsel but by actively flouting it, the client jeopardized our agency's hard-won reputation. And "Reputation" is all anyone's really got, eh? The line between transparency and discretion gets crossed when you're forced to play defense with your reputation. I "thinly veiled" the Mothersclick relationship in the original post cuz the client was truly sorry by the time I posted, and I saw no need to pile on. Day in, day out, the blog is about lessons learned, not about covering my ass. The only clarification that I’d make re: “there is more to the story” is that we are still Mothersclick’s PR agency, and that that relationship was never in jeopardy. Mothersclick execs are very happy with the relationship and with the coverage they’ve received in other outlets. If anything, we were willing to let them go because their unwillingness to follow our counsel put our agency’s reputation in jeopardy.

And that, I’d suggest, is the key point. Let me make it again: by not only refusing our counsel but by actively flouting it, the client jeopardized our agency’s hard-won reputation.

And “Reputation” is all anyone’s really got, eh? The line between transparency and discretion gets crossed when you’re forced to play defense with your reputation.

I “thinly veiled” the Mothersclick relationship in the original post cuz the client was truly sorry by the time I posted, and I saw no need to pile on.

Day in, day out, the blog is about lessons learned, not about covering my ass.

]]> By: Todd Zeigler http://www.bivingsreport.com/2006/perils-of-pr-in-the-age-of-blogging/comment-page-1/#comment-9548 Todd Zeigler Fri, 03 Nov 2006 18:21:47 +0000 http://www.bivingsreport.com/2006/perils-of-pr-in-the-age-of-blogging/#comment-9548 Seamus/Mike - I'm sure there is more going on here than we are aware. And it certainly isn't my intention to pile on here. I mostly posted because I think there is a line somewhere between being transparent (which is admirable) and being indiscreet (which isn't). This felt indiscreet to me. Seamus/Mike – I’m sure there is more going on here than we are aware. And it certainly isn’t my intention to pile on here.

I mostly posted because I think there is a line somewhere between being transparent (which is admirable) and being indiscreet (which isn’t). This felt indiscreet to me.

]]> By: Mike Driehorst http://www.bivingsreport.com/2006/perils-of-pr-in-the-age-of-blogging/comment-page-1/#comment-9546 Mike Driehorst Fri, 03 Nov 2006 18:12:57 +0000 http://www.bivingsreport.com/2006/perils-of-pr-in-the-age-of-blogging/#comment-9546 While Todd Defren's post is interesting (esp. since I think it implies the client relationship is still there), I would assume that he has a good relationship with the client to be able to make that post. PR firms are pretty quiet, so I don't think Todd was doing any damage-control for his firm with the post. I'm not sure I would've done what he did, but again, it depends on the relationship. Plus, what Seamus said, there are probably things going on that we do not know about (and it's none of our business). Mike While Todd Defren’s post is interesting (esp. since I think it implies the client relationship is still there), I would assume that he has a good relationship with the client to be able to make that post.

PR firms are pretty quiet, so I don’t think Todd was doing any damage-control for his firm with the post.

I’m not sure I would’ve done what he did, but again, it depends on the relationship. Plus, what Seamus said, there are probably things going on that we do not know about (and it’s none of our business).
Mike

]]> By: Seamus McCauley http://www.bivingsreport.com/2006/perils-of-pr-in-the-age-of-blogging/comment-page-1/#comment-9527 Seamus McCauley Fri, 03 Nov 2006 16:58:22 +0000 http://www.bivingsreport.com/2006/perils-of-pr-in-the-age-of-blogging/#comment-9527 The move by Shift doesn't make any sense in the context of the known facts - PR firms exist to get positive publicity for their clients, and this is them generating negative publicity for theirs. Which leads me to speculate that there are facts we don't know. For example, in the wake of the MothersMilk/TC debacle, it seems pretty likely that MothersMilk have got themselves a new PR firm, if only because a smart PR-er probably looked at the situation and said "hey, we could do a better job than <i>that</i>" and made picked up the phone. They have't announced it yet...but Shift probably know...so it makes sense for them to get a release out saying "this wasn't our fault" that they can point to in the future and say "look, we were saying this wasn't our fault even <i>before</i> we were fired, so it's not just sour grapes". All assumes good strategy on the part of all the players, ofc, and the absence of good strategy might instead be the fact we don't know. But that's my guess for what's going on. The move by Shift doesn’t make any sense in the context of the known facts – PR firms exist to get positive publicity for their clients, and this is them generating negative publicity for theirs.

Which leads me to speculate that there are facts we don’t know. For example, in the wake of the MothersMilk/TC debacle, it seems pretty likely that MothersMilk have got themselves a new PR firm, if only because a smart PR-er probably looked at the situation and said “hey, we could do a better job than that” and made picked up the phone. They have’t announced it yet…but Shift probably know…so it makes sense for them to get a release out saying “this wasn’t our fault” that they can point to in the future and say “look, we were saying this wasn’t our fault even before we were fired, so it’s not just sour grapes”.

All assumes good strategy on the part of all the players, ofc, and the absence of good strategy might instead be the fact we don’t know. But that’s my guess for what’s going on.

]]>