Posts Tagged ‘ NMK ’

Conflict?

Update: Had a good chat with Daryl Wilcox, and it looks like we’ve come to a sensible compromise that will allow Tim to do his job and Response Source to maintain its purity. All’s well, etc.

My staff writer at NMK - Tim Hoang - works for the PR company, Rainier, as well. That’s always something we’ve made very clear. I was (and remain I’ve calmed down now - and DW was very charming.) absolutely furious to learn that he has been banned from using the Response Source service today on account of his PR background.

For those who don’t know, Response Source allows journalists to poll PR agencies for help - "do you know any experts on mobile apps?", "got any case studies on businesses making successful use of MySpace?"; that sort of thing, in our case.

One of our key anxieties in the initial decision to employ Tim - who is a paid & taxed employee of the University of Westminster in this role - was making sure that his PR job would not infringe on his duties as a reporter for NMK. It’s an issue we’ve discussed and thought about for a long time, believe me. There are clearly opportunities for abuse, but they’re ones that Tim and I are very well-aware of and perfectly able to execute professional judgement over. Of the dozens of sources he’s used over the last two months, two were Rainier clients - to add differentiation and substance to stories, when he couldn’t find other people keen to comment. (Ironically, getting more of these other voices was one of the reasons he used Response Source). I agonised about both of them for a little while - I edit all his stories - but concluded that the extra comment had justifiable merit. In both cases, Tim informed me freely of the connection; we were transparent about the connection in the stories; and I approved it. After all, I have very little compunction about using people I’ve met in previous roles as sources: that’s what you do as a reporter.

The reason for the ban isn’t known to me in full and was not disclosed, but RS has apparently perceived a conflict of interests, in response to complaints from some other PR agency(ies).

How exactly would this work? Tim polls other PR agencies for input into a story, and that would be a problem for them for what reason? Do they think that he wouldn’t include input from competitors? So why ask the question in the first place? That he would sneak questions like ‘fancy a new agency?’ into his interviews? I think the yellow-pages might be a better source.

One more thing annoys me about this. I am the editor and publisher of NMK. Why didn’t anyone take whatever concerns they have to me, rather than a third-party? Or to my boss, the director of NMK?

F**king infantile. I will not use Response Source again while this situation continues. I have forwarded this info@dwpub.com - if anyone has a better contact, let me know.

Clients in the Wild

Just struck me, in a not-entirely-artificial way, that if you are interested in PR and the Web, as per the last post, then you ought to come to the event we’ve organised at NMK on Tuesday next week (20/11/07), ‘Clients in the Wild‘. There are about ten tickets left at this point, I understand. Click the link back there ( <— ) to find how to register.

Anyway, it’s about when companies embrace all this nakedness and transparency and conversations idea. If they do, where does the PR company’s role lie? What’s the logical outcome of this ‘cluetrain‘ railroad? It’s aimed at PRs, mainly, but everyone is welcome to come, as always.

I’ve heard some fascinating answers to that question, ranging from ‘get them to shut up quick’ to ‘embrace and dance’. If PR is reputation management, then are these power-ups, loose cannons, guardian angels, friendly fire or bulls in a china shop? Can you think of better metaphors than me? Have your Say!

Are you personally affected by this issue ? Then e-mail us. Or if you’re not affected, can you imagine what it would be like if you were ? Or if you were affected by it but don’t want to talk about it can you imagine what it would be like not being affected by it ? Why not email us ? You may not know anything about the issue, but i bet you reckon something. So why not tell us what you reckon. Let us enjoy the full majesty of your uninformed ad hoc reckoning, by going to bbc.co.uk…clicking on "what i reckon" and beating on the keyboard with your fists and your head".

(Thank you, Jem Stone)

If you’re in London and can come along, it would be great to meet with you, share a few beers and talk about this stuff. With less beating.