Journalism and PR Both Under Scrutiny: A Different Look at Hoopla Surrounding Facebook, Burson-Marsteller and Google
Lou Hoffman
By Lou Hoffman, CEO, Hoffman Agency
Boy, can we all stand up for a minute and applaud American journalism. What a country. Like Woodward and Bernstein uncovering Watergate, the investigative prowess of USA Today and The Daily Beast discovered that Facebook is worried about Google encroaching on its social networking turf. Adding to the intrigue, they found out that Facebook hired a PR agency, Burson-Marsteller, to say unflattering things about Google to reporters, analysts and other influencers.
As they say at the PR 500, let the piling on begin. Cue the checkered flag. And it’s not just the usual heavyweights like The Wall Street Journal, The New York Times, etc. Even publications like The Times of Oman got in on the action. I had to laugh when I saw this headline on page one of The Mercury News: “Facebook Waged Stealth PR War on Google.”
Stealth? I don’t think so.
To return to the Watergate metaphor, stealth is Gordon Liddy organizing a band of yahoos to follow Nixon from rally to rally.
Look, I’m not saying Burson didn’t make a mistake. They should not have agreed to keep the name of the client a secret in implementing the campaign. I suspect that the opportunity to work for the tech industry’s version of starlet was so seductive it overrode common sense.
And Facebook made a mistake in requiring its PR agency to do this work while it remained anonymous. Obviously, the media recognized the delicious irony in a social media company choosing a non-transparent path.
But c’mon, lobbyists, the staff for politicians, special interest groups as well as PR agencies all strive to advance their clients’ position which can mean sharing negative information about the competition with people of influence.
Again, what’s key is the person you’re talking to deserves to know who you represent so he/she can put the information in context—i.e, what’s your agenda?
That’s how we operate. That’s how anyone in a similar position should operate.
With that said, where does the media fit into this episode beyond showing the herd mentality is alive and well? Did any reporters write negative things about Google’s Social Circle without the context of knowing who was footing the bill for Burson’s work? Even if the answer is yes, I doubt we’ll be reading this side of the story.
Laziness doesn’t make good copy.
A couple closing thoughts:
The account folks from Burson, Jim Goldman and John Mercurio, have been skewered in the media. I don’t know Mercurio, but I do feel the need to defend Jim Goldman. My agency knows Jim Goldman from his days at CNBC and before. He’s a smart guy who knows how to put together a story. This is not his failure. The person at Burson who took on the assignment and instructed Gold to mush forward is at fault. Goldman’s instincts probably told him this was a bad idea, but with less than a year under his belt after making the move from journalism to PR, he didn’t have the seat time to say to his boss, “Are you crazy.”
Like any business, this episode shows when a decision maker doesn’t use common sense or worse, loses his or her moral compass, things can go astray.
PR gets it right 99.9 percent of time. Which I suspect puts us in the same ballpark as journalism.
###
Lou Hoffman is CEO of the Hoffman Agency, a communications consultancy with offices in the U.S., Asia, and Europe. He blogs on storytelling through a business prism at Ishmael’s Corner.
You may also be interested in...
Time to stop “defending” PR as innocent. Just because it was the behemoth Burson doesn’t mean it has blackened PR’s mark any darker than it already is. After having been in PR for close to 30 years, I have to say that PR doesn’t get it right 99.9 percent of the time. If it did, we wouldn’t have the reputation we do. But it is up to the rest of us to show our clients we aren’t all smoke and mirrors but can be a strategy partner and can truly add to the bottom line without resorting to unsavory tactics. And, to say that Jim Goldman was innocent in this? Come on. He was hired from CNBC for exactly this reason-to give BM persepctive and clients balance on what is a good story and what is the best way to sell it. Not to mention his connections… I don’t have a problem with jumping from journalism to PR. It can be done and done well. But don’t give Goldman a pass-it was his JOB to say no to his bosses.
I hope your post reminds more of our peers in PR to never lose their moral compass or common sense. I also hope you’re right in saying we get it right 99.9% of the time. PR is about transparency, communication and integrity. Without that we have no trust, and without trust we have no credibility. Did BM really think that FB and Google would fight in our backyard and no one would notice?
What an appalling and frankly sad take on this issue. Under the guise of the-end-justifies-the-means rationalization you have espoused and exemplified all that is wrong with the profession of PR: complete lack of accountability with an approach completely devoid of ethics. You call what Burson and Facebook did “mistakes” when people that operate with a code of honesty and respect say this was blatant and inexcusable deception on numerous levels that only serves to create a communications landscape of convolution, fear, and uncertainty that, in the end, inhibits communication rather than foster it. I know, I know, you’re saying that your post is all about honestly and that would have solved all the problems here. But you might consider that respect and accountability are the behaviors that manifest honesty. You can’t see honesty, but you can certainly see the results of it in respect and accountability. Not one person involved from any end of this demonstrated those core values (yourself included). Just so you know not all PR professionals (yes I’m one of them) “operate” they way you do. Many believe that sharing negative information is unacceptable in way, shape or form; it’s disrespectful. And when you say Jim Goldman has no culpability, it’s the person who gave him the assignment who’s to blame. “It’s not his failure.” Are you kidding me? It’s absolutely his failure for not standing up for what is right and having some accountability over his actions. What he was asked to do was wrong and if he knew as you indicate he must have, then he’s the one who should bear the brunt of all the criticism. If you can’t stand up for respect and accountability in the face of deceit, you have no place representing anyone. One positive for the profession in all this is that people who work this way are being exposed. Let’s hope that continues.
O.k. folks,
Maybe we get it right 97.3 percent of the time. I’m just trying to get horse-shoe close.
The reason you read about PR gaffes more than media gaffes is simple. The media loves to write about the PR gaffes but take a much more understanding stance with their brethren.
And to indict an entire organization because of one person’s decision is simply reckless. I don’t think Burson’s culture perpetuates a lack of judgment in the quest for the almight buck. If it did, we would be reading about Burson every month.
Last, I’m glad to hear some PR folks can effectively operate in a fairy-tale frame and don’t need to bother with “little” details like positioning the client against the competition.
Vicki @Smartwoman Flaugher here – I too wrote a blog on my take on the B-M situation – I am not inclined to give any of them a pass, mostly because what they did was not honorable and nobody seems too sorry about it. Just following orders is not the sign of a professional. Choosing to not adhere to your own standards is not honorable. Further exacerbating your “mistakes” by making more isn’t smart business. You don’t have to engage in this type of seemingly deceitful/covert activity to position your clients against their competition. And, if this type of thing were just one person, PR (nor journalists) would have a problem with their reputations, generally speaking. Sometimes the PR release is accurate. Other times, you have to know it’s not. Knowing which time is which is our jobs. In an industry that self-regulates (or is supposed to), overlooking and dismissing this type of behavior won’t get any of us ahead. A mea culpa and fresh spun PR release won’t solve this problem. Cut it out.
BTW – full disclosure – I write for commPRO but these are my personal views.