Peter Shankman’s recent post I Will Never Hire a “Social Media Expert,” and Neither Should You is a cheap shot that could have been much more useful, but was instead focused on name calling and sensationalism.

Shankman opens with “I was going to call this article All ‘Social Media Experts’ need to go die in a fire, but I figured I should be nicer than that.” I know he’s trying to be humorous here, but regrettably, he isn’t.

This post has been done a hundred times before, and worst of all, it’s not that well executed. It also disparages a bunch of people, many of whom might be charlatans but many more of whom are hard working professionals trying to make a go of it in a rapidly changing world. Shankman’s attitude is basically: “f*** them.”

Shankman’s “real” point is: people need more than basic social media competency to contribute to a company’s bottom line. I agree with him, but this was the wrong way to go about making the point. Social media has unique attributes like immediacy, user-generated content, two-way conversation, virality (hate the word), etc. People who are not experts in these things will not know how to implement successful and well integrated social media marketing and communications campaigns in their companies.

Shankman believes “Social Media is just another facet of marketing and customer service.” This is a narrow view of the role social media has assumed in the corporate world. Social media is widely used in public relations and corporate communications. It is used in building communities. When the Red Cross uses SMS, Twitter and the Web to help the victims of disasters find food and shelter, that is neither marketing nor customer service. The organization is actually doing its work via social media.

There are numerous flaws in the piece, many of which are called out in the comments and nearly all of which Shankman dismisses out of hand. Shankman identifies himself as a “Social Media Entrepreneur,” yet defends this as somehow different. Logically, if the adjective “Social media” lacks substance and usefulness, as Shankman asserts, and shouldn’t be used to describe an expert, an authority, or a guru, it must have similar problems when describing an entrepreneur.

I haven’t ignored the substance of Shankman’s piece. With a new title and a shift in opening focus, this could be a sensational summary of the importance of transparency, relevance, brevity, etc. in marketing and putting these things ahead of the gimmickry social media sometimes brings to the fore. It just wouldn’t generate so many links and comments.

Tags: business buzz words, buzzwords, jargon

While contemplating an ethical or legal gaffe or some other action that might discredit a company or organization, many executives forget that their actions will long outlive the media frenzy in the days and weeks after they are disclosed. Some will be forever branded with a scarlet “S” (for screw-up) monogrammed on their blazers and shirt pockets.

Amidst a less-than-stellar earnings announcement by Hewlett-Packard today, new CEO Leo Apotheker blamed the company’s services division and its “missed opportunities” under his predecessor Mark Hurd. Reuters goes on to say “Apotheker indirectly blamed the services unit’s problems on Hurd, who left the company in August amid allegations of sexual harassment.”

It’s been less than a year since Hurd was gently escorted to the door, but his tech media legacy is clear: he’s a cheating lowlife who incidentally ran one of the world’s largest and successful (over the long haul) companies. And the new CEO is also blaming him for the company’s financial woes.

More recently, Kenneth Cole committed an online faux pas that illustrated the blinding speed with which social media transmits news of reputational screw-ups.

We do forgive some who commit ethical blunders, and time seems to help. Nixon was the center of of some of the dirtiest tricks in American politics, yet many have softened their stance in light of his 1972 trip to China, which led to the establishment of formal ties between the U.S. and China. And sometimes we forget. Who ever mentions the late Kenneth Lay, convicted of fraud and conspiracy just five years ago?

What is clear, is that at least for a time, we label people who commit legal and ethical missteps with their deeds, a phenomenon that should be considered carefully before proceeding along any questionable path.

Tags: reputation management, executive, ethics

I’ve been amused and disturbed by some of the press coverage of the trial of International Monetary Fund head Dominique Strauss-Kahn on charges that he attempted to rape a hotel chambermaid. My favorite piece is this video produced by Reuters which I saw on Yahoo! News.

The video scans newspaper headlines at various New York City newsstands. I could not believe the headline in the screen shot above “HE DID HAVE SEX WITH THE MAID,” from the New York Post.

No one considers the Post the last bastion of accuracy and fairness, but is Reuters negligent, or at least careless, in reproducing, without comment or disclaimer, the Post headline? (Which is of course untrue. Strauss-Kahn has not been convicted.) And what about Yahoo for running the video? In an era where it seems there are only three sources for news video, who has responsibility for reproducing, rerunning, republishing content? When you eliminate diversity, quality and trustworthiness suffer.

Tags: Dominique Strauss-Kahn, IMF, world press

It’s standard behavior to rush to the call for investigation and change in response to every news item. If a brick falls from a fifth-story window and hits someone on the head, the evening news can be counted on to look into the shortcomings of the brick industry, and ask, “Surely they knew their bricks were lethal. But what did they do about it?”

And so it is in public relations. Following the disclosure that PR agency Burson Marsteller mounted a covert anti-Google campaign on behalf of (at-the-time-undisclosed) client Facebook, we’re all analyzing the behavior of the participants and advising them on how they can do better in the future.

WebProNews writes not only is “Burson’s reputation under assault but also its credibility as knowledgeable and skilful practitioners in public relations is being questioned as a consequence.” WebProNews points out that the Burson executives involved will receive training in ethics, and quotes the WPP (Burson’s parent company) Code of Ethics:

“We will not undertake work which is intended or designed to mislead, including in relation to social, environmental and human rights issues;”

But what is truly learned here? Burson had a code of ethics. Are we to believe the agency really has executives who have never read it, have never received ethics training, don’t understand the importance of ethical behavior?

Or did a couple of people approve and execute a stupid campaign knowing it wasn’t the right thing to do? And if that’s the case, what is the utility of analyzing Burson’s behavior against a backdrop of codes of ethics? What can we truly learn from this approach?

It’s a very simple matter. Let’s not complicate it. My advice to Burson (and to any PR agency or professional):

1. Be honest and ethical
2. Know your agency’s code of ethics, and consult it often
3. If your agency does not have a code of ethics, consult Craigslist and PRSA to find a new agency

What else is there?

Tags: Burson Marsteller, Facebook, Google, smear campaign

AT&T’s ATTScanner app lets you scan a bar code which in turn takes you to a web site where you can buy the object you just scanned. This emerging application for mobile phone-based bar code scanning is what I call hard-wired web results.

I downloaded the app (released last year but new to me) to my iPhone and my daughter and I began scanning all the items on the table at the local sushi place. Once you scan an object (the app scans both regular UPC/EAN bar codes found on retail packages and larger/higher capacity “stacked” QR codes), the AT&T app offers you a handful of web results.The user interface and implementation of the scanner are excellent, but the results are not that useful.

As you can see from this scan of Coffeemate Creamer, there is only one result. (With one more tap I got additional details.)

It does (as they say in QR code marketing) bridge the gap between the digital and physical world. I am ashamed to admit I take photos of books in bookstores so I can later search for the best price on eBay and Amazon. Apps like ATTScanner greatly simplify this process.

With such a small number of results, the AT&T app is not useful. Choice is such an important part of search. AT&T should link the app to Google or Bing, but it does not, so if you don’t like its one offer for Coffeemate Creamer, you’re out of luck. I suspect the business model is that sellers pay AT&T to list their products on ATTScanner. If there were 50 to 100 results, all screened by AT&T, I’d probably find this useful. There’s so much crap on Google, so managed search results have their appeal. For now, though, it is a curiosity, but more sophisticated, useful applications of mobile bar code technology are showing up all the time.

Tags: qr codes, digital, attscanner