About this blog

  • My day job - I am founder of Battenhall, communications agency for the social media economy.


Subscribe to this blog

  • Subscribe to this site by email or RSS

    This is my personal blog and does not reflect the views of my company or clients.

Blog powered by Typepad


« Hallam Foe joins the Bebo Kate Modern blog soap | Main | The future of web 2.0 from McKinsey »

August 24, 2007


Agree with all this but who has the time to fully join all these networks and surely if you cut off the information flow and messaging completely from the corporate world any network would be missing an important perspective even if it is one of parasitic bullshit?

It isn't about social networks but the art of conversation a la networking.

Companies do pay their agencies to be on all these networks and to advise on which show the most potential for their brand.I find the PR people that talk the most sense when it comes to digital media consultancy are those that have tried it.

The thing that strikes me is that the blogosphere is made up of many varying opinions. Some don't mind news releases whereas some loathe them.

Some don't mind being contacted by PR people, some love receiving products for review. Heck, some feed off PR delivered content so to fuel their blog to increase traffic to charge more for advertising.

Some aren't bothered about having a 'conversation', they just want you to send the news release (or SMNR) and make it quick please.

It's horses for courses but I totally respect and would never send to those that don't want to receive it.

"And maybe bloggers need to realise that if they publish and they have an audience, they are vehicles conveying messages, and companies will always look to sign them up."

Couldn't agree more. The internet is a wide open commercial platform - many of the PR haters make a living from it. Why can't PR if done properly?

I'm sort of stunned by what you say here, and I think the reason is that you somehow seem to be arguing that I'm somehow naïve for being unhappy about being targetted by PR companies. It's just something that will happen you seem to be saying, because I am 'a vehicle conveying messages'.

I don't see how this makes PR companies any better than spammers? They might be more sensitive and clever about it, but basically they look at my site as a mechanism for their advancement, as a vehicle for conveying messages, which is precisely how a spammer would view it. And I am perfectly within my rights to consider spammers parasites and a curse on the world? Why is it different in the case of PR people?

The comments to this entry are closed.