I am trying something new today, a podcast comment on a For Immediate Release show.
However, I wrote out my comment initially, so I can reproduce most of it here:
Commenting on Shel Holtz's and Neville Hobson's For Immediate Release show on the 1st of January. Shel and Neville continued the discussion concerning the Microsoft vista review program. Microsoft had sent out a number of laptops with a copy of vista to several bloggers. Unfortunately the review program was poorly executed. Bloggers were not asked if they wanted to receive the laptops, and no system was set up for the bloggers to return the laptops. This review program can be contrasted with the Nokia cell phone review program launched last year by Andy Abramson. In that program bloggers were asked if they wanted to receive a phone initially, and given the ability to return the phone. Overall the execution of the Microsoft vista blogger relations was poor.
If we are commenting on the success of a public relations or blogger relations program, whether we agree or disagree with receiving product to review a product or not, it appears that the program has received some bad press as a result of the execution. It may be that another company other than Microsoft or its agency Edelman might not have received as much bad press in the blogosphere about their actions. But that's all the reason to be more careful in the approach to such programs.
Neville had mentioned that bloggers are not journalists. He is right, however, for a blogger to establish credibility with an audience, that blogger has to ensure that there is an appearance of credibility. The reader who reads a magazine, newspaper or blog is the same reader and will judge the quality of an article on its merits and the reputation of the media and the writer, whether written by a journalist or blogger. A blogger might not be a journalist but if the blogger wants credibility, as credibility builds trust, and recognition in the community that can produce higher readership and many more benefits. I think any blogger should start to think about how accepting products for free will affect an audience’s perception of their credibility.
The society of professional journalists has a code of ethics that provides some interesting perspectives on these issues, I think all bloggers should consider this code and determine how it might work for them.
Part of the code states that journalists should “Act Independently, where Journalists should be free of obligation to any interest other than the public's right to know. And journalists should Refuse gifts, favors, fees, free travel and special treatment, and shun secondary employment, political involvement, public office and service in community organizations if they compromise journalistic integrity.”
I know that some journalists do accept products for free to review, and would return the product if received in this way, while some do not. To me everyone blogger or journalist should declare how they procured a product for review.
Neville had mentioned Chip Griffin, the CEO of CustomScoop. Chip had suggested there was too much criticism of Microsoft and Edelman, or at the very least Chip had thought that the way in which people had discussed the issue was over the top.
I’m not sure exactly what Chip had said as I did not see the reference but I think Chip brings up an important issue if I have a correct understanding of his concerns. To me this whole discussion is healthy and lively, and one that would not have been possible just a few years ago. Certainly, readers have always commented on newspaper articles or called into television stations, but ordinary people now have much more power as they have the ability to publish their own content on a blog. A feature of this new reality is that there are many more opinions expressed and sometimes those opinions are not going to be polished. That’s okay with me; I think it’s an important part of the evolving landscape of blogging, podcasts and videologs. I also think the actual discussion about the ethics of product reviewing is good. We do not have this discussion with newspapers and magazines. I’d like to know how many traditional media companies actually do follow the Professional society of journalists’ guidelines and don’t accept gifts and payment? I also wonder how many independent writers do accept free products for review and then publish their reviews in traditional media publications and websites? I also think the only reason there is any debate about Microsoft and Edelman is because bloggers have the ability to write about the background to a story, whereas most journalists don’t have the time or space to write about the research that went into a story. I believe this debate helps the whole community think through these issues, and shows the relevancy of ethics in today’s media rich world.
However, what’s really important is what the customers think? Do customers want product reviews from people who receive the product for free or who pay for the product? If you have to pay, and you are a blogger reviewing many products, and you don’t have a company paying for the review products or are independently wealthy does that mean many bloggers will have to stop reviewing products? Or is there an alternative for bloggers without funding can the bloggers ask their audience for funds to review products? Is there an example of this available?
If I was advising a company to run a product review program I’d have done a few things differently than what Microsoft was advised to do. Anyone looking for a great example of a well executed product review program could not do better than look at Nokia phone product review program starting at the end of 2005.
