Brendan Hodgson

Toxic Shower Curtains... or a sign of things to come?

Brendan Hodgson — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 12:54:00 GMT

Woke up to find a link to this New York Times story in my inbox.

Albeit a tad depressing given the context, it's also an important reminder of the "art of strategic word selection" as a means to grab the attention of media and influencers via both the newswires and the search engines. Equally important, however, it highlights the rising "sensationalist" tide that pervades today's media environment, and the potential for damage that it can cause.

"With varying amounts of credulousness, other outlets ran with it as well, including U.S. News & World Report, The Daily News in New York, MSNBC.com and The Los Angeles Times. The gist of some of the coverage was that it was all a tempest in a bathtub, though other reports took the information at face value."

While this story about toxic shower curtains appears to have been successfully debunked by most mainstream media from the outset, the fact that even some took the information at "face value" is worrisome. Quite simply, the potential for other questionable research to cause significantly greater and longer-term damage to an organization or industry given the rush to publish, appears to be increasing, particularly as stories are picked up and shared across the social web. Vigilance will be critical.

On a lighter note, however, I agree fully with one PR expert's assertion - cited in the same article - that such dreck as “solutions,” “leading edge,” “cutting edge,” “state of the art,” “mission critical,” and “turnkey” are, without question, the kiss of death.

Friday Digital Miscellany: Crisis, activism & a behind-the-scenes look at what IT is really up to?

Brendan Hodgson — Fri, 27 Jun 2008 12:09:00 GMT

Summer in London may not be springtime in Paris, but at least it didn't rain last week for an internal digital and crisis conference I attended with fellow H&K crisis practitioners from across Europe, North America and Asia.

The key learning of the two-day event - other than to not let Cy Twombly's art truly aggravate you: digital can no longer be considered an afterthought when preparing for, or executing during a crisis. It must be burned into the system from the outset - the technology, the people and the processes. It must become an integral part of the training regimen, be designed to support various crisis thresholds and provide sufficient flexibility to evolve as the crisis evolves. And not only is it simply about launching a "dark site" or adding a line item to a manual. It is also about guiding employee behaviours online, assessing how and when to respond (and not respond) to misinformation and speculation that may be bubbling throughout the social web, considering new ways and formats to deliver content and messaging, and working with other functional areas (per my last post) to ensure the 'machine' operates seamlessly.

Developments on the activism and social media front and the impact of the citizen journalist on the newsmaking process also caught my eye this week. In Canada, much like what happened recently in the U.S. over downed cattle resulting in one of the largest beef recalls in history, activists using a hidden camera were able to reveal what many consider to be questionable practices related to the slaughter of horses. And while the footage generated considerable media coverage, it also raised a number of questions related to how the industry is regulated. Not only is this further demonstration of the increasing levels of transparency now being imposed upon organizations through the use of technology and the rising importance of video and images to communicate in a way that text never could, it also demonstrates how easily such footage can be taken out of context, according to one industry expert:

"...Shanyn Silinski, executive director of the Farm Animal Council in Manitoba, an animal welfare group, noted regulations govern the slaughter industry... Silinski cautioned against drawing conclusions about a particular facility based on clips of camera footage."

Finally, and on a more humorous side, props to Churbuck for Thewebsiteisdown.com, one sick video that, in the words of Homer Simpson, is funny cuz it's true.

Effective digital PR reaches beyond the Comms Department

Brendan Hodgson — Tue, 17 Jun 2008 08:43:00 GMT

Before jumping on a plane to London last night, I was invited to speak to the senior legal officer of a major Canadian corporation. The point of the meeting was to discuss the impact that digital communications, and social media in particular, was having on organizations as a result of the heightened transparency being imposed upon them - both from within and without.

With thousands of employees potentially speaking on behalf of the corporation through blogs, social networks or other online channels - willingly or not, and appropriately or not - the level of exposure faced by many organizations is daunting.

Which makes our job that much more exciting - if not extraordinarily difficult - as the reputational implications of the social web bleed into other functional areas of the corporation -- be it HR, Legal, IT, and the c-suite. It reinforces the need for communicators to become increasingly knowledgeable about all aspects of an organization, not simply communications or marketing. And it is an area of opportunity that - if approached correctly - will allow PR to extend its reach beyond the traditional grey areas currently being fought over by ad firms, digital shops, and PR consultancies.

As the Arthur Page Society’s "Authentic Enterprise" whitepaper sets out, communicators must now become stewards of reputation rather than owners of it. Which means that tomorrow's communicators must be trained not only to learn about the craft of communications, both traditional and digital, they must also learn about how organizations function beyond the narrow silo in which we currently operate, and be able to strategically apply their knowledge to supporting the challenges these functions now face. They must be able to guide and shape the behaviours of the organization, recognizing that virtually every employee is now a potential avenue - frightening as it may be to some - to communicate the organization's messages, and perhaps do so better than the c-suite or PR department ever could.

I often ask organizations if they're ready to embrace the changes being forced upon them as a result of the social web - but perhaps we need to be asking ourselves that same question.

Employees, Social media and Reputation... A Month of Discussions

Brendan Hodgson — Fri, 13 Jun 2008 11:40:00 GMT

June was never going to be an easy month, yet we're nearly half-way through and I'm starting to breathe a little easier. Two conference presentations down, and two more to go - although the latter two will be more internally and client-focused which tends to make life a bit easier (he says, knocking wood).

Over this past week, Amanda Brewer, H&K Canada's director of internal and change communications, and I have spoken at two events: the first being the 2008 CPRS National Conference in Halifax, Nova Scotia, and the second being to the Council of Human Resource Executives in beautiful Quebec City (currently celebrating its 400th anniversary - I suggest you go. I hadn't been to QC in years, and it's as stunning as ever).

Although slightly different in their focus, the general theme of the presentations were the same: that social media and Web 2.0 is transforming the role of the employee as "brand guardian". And while this transformation is creating opportunities to drive greater transparency and bring employees closer to those upon whom the company relies - customers, communities, partners, potential employees etc., it is also highlighting a number of potential risks and challenges with respect to employee behaviour online and the consequences that could follow, intentional or no. In the presentations we highlighted examples of companies who have done it right, and we explored examples of what happens when employees take it upon themselves to communicate on behalf of the organization through social media, to both positive and negative effect.

At CPRS, we dived deeper into how organized labour has adopted social media in their efforts to communicate their stories and messages beyond traditional media filters and mobilize their membership and supporters, and considered how corporations are (or should be) responding. In Quebec City, we explored how organizations could (and should) help to guide employees in their use of social media - realizing that the workforce of tomorrow will have grown-up using these tools as part of their daily lives. Both are areas of increasing innovation in public and private sector workspaces, and judging by the level of discussion that ensued, it's an area of increasing concern to those who practice in these areas.

Interestingly, I also see these discussions as an opportunity for organizations to further bridge the silos separating HR and internal and external communications departments given the increasing visibility of employees as brand advocates. And, as always, when we talk about "tomorrow's employees", I started off by showing this video - in my view, a creative and powerful perspective of the changes taking place in our society and mindset. (kudos to Dr. Michael Wesch at Kansas State University)

Next week, I will be in the U.K participating in an internal conference on crisis and digital, and working with our network of senior crisis practitioners to ensure our counsel and strategies reflect the digital dynamic and the potential for digital tools to support organizational communications when the stakes are highest - much as we've seen during the California Wildfires, and recent campus shooting. Interestingly, the area of crisis is another where the potential for employees to both support or, unfortunately, harm an organization's communications efforts is becoming increasingly important.

The week following, my colleague Boyd Neil and I will be in Vancouver (I get to spend a whole 16 hours in Ottawa in between, yay!!) where I hope we'll be able to take some of the learnings from the UK and apply them to a joint presentation to a global corporation (and client) on reputation, issues management and the impact of digital and social media.

Then Canada Day... and then a long rest.

If you're in London and are able to get together on the night of the 20th or 21st, do get in touch.

"Supercuts" and their impact on reputation

Brendan Hodgson — Tue, 27 May 2008 12:02:00 GMT

I was reading a recent post by Andy Baio on the proliferation of what he calls "supercuts" or video montages made by obsessive fans of their favourite TV shows, films or video games - and he lists quite a few classics.

What's interesting is how easily I see this format transferring into both the political and corporate arena by organizations and individuals seeking to capture a litany of "promises" or statements made by elected officials or corporate spokespersons either to demonstrate support for or, more likely as in the case of this famous "flip-flop" video of John McCain (courtesy of Jeff Jarvis), highlight more negative behaviours.

As more and more "gotcha" moments are captured on film or audio and shared throughout the social web (here's a recent, and extremely powerful, example) , the implication on corporate, political and personal reputation is significant. The aggregation of incidents such as these over time coupled with the permanence and searchability of the web, could become a significantly damaging force in times of crisis, and when organizations (and their reputations) are under the spotlight.

Nor is this "syndrome" restricted solely to the social web. Increasingly, mainstream media are collecting and presenting lists of "related" stories around organizations and issues that often - through selective aggregation - portray that organization in a negative light - typically highlighting recent stories of past tragedies, crashes, blow-outs etc., or other failings that have hit the media (case in point).

And the risk of reputation damage becomes even more acute when these clips and stories are aggregated without context, or with the intent to portray a specific bias, further propagating this culture of misinformation within which we increasingly exist.

For those charged to defend an organization's reputation, it won't be enough to simply cry out: Noooooooooo!

Random notes on online reputation management in 2008

Brendan Hodgson — Wed, 14 May 2008 12:45:00 GMT

Everyday, innovative campaigns and tactics emerge from all sides of virtually every issue. At the same time, it's encouraging to see corporations increasing their level of experimentation in the digital space around the areas of reputation management.

Here's just a few recent examples of highly visible campaigns designed to both challenge and reinforce the reputations of leading corporations:

Few organizations understand how to trigger a response better than PETA... and their latest MTV-style video campaign is no exception. The campaign - including the site itself - is reminiscent of the recent spate of cinematic gorefests - think the Hostel or Saw series - and, as such, primed for the youth segment that it's attempting to reach. It reinforces the importance of the "extraordinary" idea (and the power of video) to be heard above the "noise", while also effectively demonstrating - as any activist campaign should - how to bridge seamlessly between entertainment, education, and engagement.
On the other side, Southwest Airlines has recently taken their already impressive "Nuts About Southwest" social media campaign up a notch and added a slew of new features - including a Flickr group, video blog, and links to their Twitter feed and Facebook group - to further connect with their massive community of fans and advocates (and to directly address emerging issues as they've done with their blog in recent months).
Lastly, in the footsteps of Ideastorm and MyStarbucksidea, American Express has launched Cardmembers Voice as a way to solicit ideas on how to improve their products and services, and to strengthen their engagement with cardholders. [update: Amex is an H&K Canada client]

More to follow in the weeks ahead.

In times of crisis, digital education in the c-suite is critical

Brendan Hodgson — Fri, 09 May 2008 16:41:00 GMT

I spoke recently at a dinner attended by a number of boards of directors of large Canadian corporations. The topic of conversation was digital crisis management. What was interesting, and what carried through the dinner discussion that ensued, was the awareness gap that existed at the executive level; specifically, that the issues we talk about and evangelize on an almost daily basis at the departmental level and in our conversations and blog posts are rarely finding their way into the c-suite despite their increasing signficance to the long-term reputation of the companies these individuals represent.

In recent months, I along with my colleagues have spoken on a number of occasions to senior leadership teams on these issues. Each time, we reiterate the importance of executive-level understanding of the new environment and the necessity to obtain their buy-in on key principles of effective online crisis management. Reputation management in times of crisis is a c-suite issue, and as Clarke Caywood of Northwestern University famously said, "Any assault on the reputation of a company is a crisis... and reputations are built on how management responds to crises."

Put 60 people in a room with beer and you're bound to learn something...

Brendan Hodgson — Tue, 06 May 2008 12:49:00 GMT

Another Third Tuesday is behind us and, like those before it, generated some interesting and healthy debate. And although intended to focus on "Shiny New Objects" (SNOs), last night's discussion really did anything but - to the consternation of some, but not I think to others (myself included)... Key takeaways? In no particular order of importance, I felt they were as follows:

It re-affirmed that while SNO's are emerging every day, the reality is that the majority of our clients are only now taking their first steps into what might best be described as the "tried and true" - blogs, Youtube, Facebook etc. - for the most part because it is these tools that align best with their objectives, and where the most examples of success exist.
It highlighted the challenge of co-organizing a meetup that attracts a broad cross-section of people who not only represent communicators experienced with social media, but also newcomers, designers, advertisers, developers, enthusiasts, those who work in the private sector, those who represent start-ups and not-for-profit, and those in government. Personally, I'm not sure we can continue to try to be all things to all people. At the same time, the networking is always fun.
It hammered home that social media - within the context of my work (and that of many others) - must be viewed for what it is: an enabler of communication and interaction. More important still is the quality of the content delivered by that technology (be it a video, a blog post, a comment etc.) that makes that communication relevant, or simply turns it into "white noise".
It ~~begged~~ raised the question as to whether social media will ever be adopted in a significant way, within an enterprise context, so long as the application is in "permanent beta"?
Not surprisingly (though I would certainly argue this fact), it demonstrated that social media in a corporate context remains, for many, an apparent contradiction (in their eyes) between the "motivations" that drives corporate behaviour and the social media ethos of transparency, engagement, and community.
It clearly showcased the hunger among public servants to expand the use of social media more broadly within government, despite the apparent roadblocks (political and otherwise).
It revealed Joe Thornley's fascination with video - particularly when witnessing his attempt at getting those low-to-the-ground angles (double-chin, anyone)
It gave as good as it got - and that's something I think we don't do enough of in this space. Glad to see we challenged each other.

Third Tuesday Ottawa is Back... featuring a rag-tag line-up including yours truly

Brendan Hodgson — Wed, 30 Apr 2008 13:17:00 GMT

Yes, we at Third Tuesday Ottawa have been remiss... although I blame Joe and his uncooperative appendix.

But what with work, and trying to find top speakers who were prepared to brave the Ottawa winter, the stars just never seemed to align.

But hey, we're back! And (he says smugly) the speaker line-up is awesome!

"It seems that almost every day, we hear an announcement of a new social media tool, social network or open standard that the inventors tell us we soon won't be able to live without. At this month's Third Tuesday Ottawa, we have a panel of Colin McKay, Ryan Anderson and Brendan Hodgson to lead a discussion of which social media tools are most useful and which are just code looking for a reason to be."

Hmmm... there could be some very interesting tangents to follow here.

The rest of the deets:

Monday, May 5, 2008 at 6:00 pm

Clocktower Brew Pub
575 Bank Street downstairs
Ottawa , ON K1P 5N4
613-233-7849

And kudos, once again, to our sponsors, CNW Group, who make it possible for us to keep Third Tuesdays as free events for the social media community.

Crisis Communications and 'Official Languages'

Brendan Hodgson — Fri, 18 Apr 2008 12:46:00 GMT

I spoke at an IABC event last night on crisis communications and social media, and it prompted an interesting question (particularly given that many of the audience hailed from government organizations): How do you reconcile the importance of timely communications with the need to communicate in both official languages?

The question was posed by a communications advisor at a prominent federal agency. But it's also a topic that has arisen several times in discussions with clients around the development of their crisis dark sites.

It's an important question, as strict adherence to "official language" regulations could impact an organization's ability to respond quickly to an issue.

Ultimately, my position - based on discussions to-date - is that stakeholders will forgive uni-lingual communication if the effort is focused on pushing out vital information in as timely and transparent a fashion as possible. What they will not forgive is knowing that you intentionally withheld critical information for the sake of political expedience.

Granted, this deviation from "regulation" would tend to apply more to situations such as accidents or disasters whether man-made or natural, and where risk to health and safety requires rapid communication. Whereas, with a crises of confidence where a few hours spent ensuring communication in both official languages is coordinated, timing might be less of an issue. Likewise, this holds true in situations where you're communicating more than a few lines or paragraphs that could easily be translated within minutes.

But when you look to how Northern Illinois University was, for example, rapidly updating their site as events of the shooting unfolded (see attached image), would anyone have complained if (and were this a Canadian institution obliged to abide by Official Language laws), they had only communicated in one language?

Naive, perhaps? You tell me.

Watergate hero on what makes good journalism

Brendan Hodgson — Thu, 17 Apr 2008 12:30:00 GMT

Earlier this week, Roy Greenslade at the Guardian summarized a talk given by Carl Bernstein to attendees of the Perugia Journalism Festival. From the perspective of better understanding the motivations of media in times of crisis, and the culture of misinformation that now dominates the information landscape - driven primarily by the web - Bernstein's insights are powerful reinforcement for those who, like myself, believe that the traditional media is under enormous pressure from a variety of forces - both financial and sociological.

"(Bernstein) talked of consolidation by the conglomerates that 'makes truth-seeking secondary to making huge profits'. And, given that making any profit all has become increasingly difficult, the task of carrying out good journalism is more difficult than ever before.

Good journalism, (Bernstein) explained, is "a simple matter but difficult to achieve", namely "trying to obtain the best attainable version of the truth." And the best way of doing that? "Being a good listener." And? "Listening to source after source after source". And? Knocking on doors and wearing out shoe leather.

Bernstein believes that the web is redefining "what is news" and "is taking us back towards what news ought to be." He agreed that there was also "unchecked crap" in the blogosphere but, overall, his view of the possibilities of online journalism seemed very positive. He liked the "free-for-all, opinionated, noisy, different stuff" that is available on the web."

Transparency and the Media - a behind-the-scenes glimpse into why a story changes

Brendan Hodgson — Thu, 10 Apr 2008 12:08:00 GMT

Transparency is a term oft-used in the web 2.0 context. Typically, however, it applies to the application of social media by consumers/citizens to impose a previously-unattainable level of transparency on corporate behaviour. Examples are legion - Sleeping Comcast Technicians, battlin' AOL client service reps, breakable bike locks, leaking toilets on aircraft, astro-turfing - and many more (just check out the Consumerist for the latest juice).

But from the perspective of crisis and issues management, mainstream media are also facing increasing scrutiny (as they should) from the ranks of citizen journalists. Ever since the Dan Rather hullabaloo over reporting of George W. Bush's war record, otherwise known as Memogate or Rathergate, the impact of bloggers as media watchdogs has only intensified.

The implications are significant and should continue to be discussed. A recent email exchange purported to be between an activist and a BBC reporter over perceived "inaccuracies" in a story on climate change offers a fascinating insight into today's news environment, and raises some interesting questions:

Regardless if the changes made the story more accurate or, in the words of one blogger, "(morphed) the article's tenor from dialogue to lecture with a minimum of extorted word processing" (and that's not the point of this post), should the reporter - for the sake of transparency - have made the changes as a discrete "update" to the original with an adjusted timestamp, or was he within his rights to make the changes into the existing story without reflecting the fact that the original story had in fact been altered?

Secondly, does this not speak to the importance of including a comments section (as many media outlets now do) on all stories or features in order to allow interested parties to address perceived inaccuracies without injecting their potential bias into the actual story. A less optimal solution, perhaps, but could the journalist not simply have continued the story based on the email exchange that ensued?

In a crisis environment, where media are already under incredible pressure and where the need to be first often overrides the need to be accurate, incidents such as this (assuming that this is an accurate reflection of a real exchange - and I tend to believe it is) are worth considering. From this writer's perspective, it compromises the trust that many place in the mainstream media to be as accurate and unbiased as possible, potentially leading those audiences to seek information elsewhere. At the same time, it acknowledges the need to work closely with media to ensure that what you provide in times of crisis go beyond soundbites and are substantiated by credible information and defensible proof points (since, clearly there will be pressure on the journalist from all fronts to "get it right"). And it further reinforces the importance of relying on your own channels to communicate versus relying solely on a "filtered" media.

When what you see is not always what you get...

Brendan Hodgson — Fri, 04 Apr 2008 12:56:00 GMT

You don't need to read German to understand the point being made here... and in all the other classic examples gathered for your viewing pleasure.

Although in addition to "buyer beware", I would also suggest that this is one more example of the power of the consumer to impose a previously-unattainable degree of transparency on the "fantasy" being sold by advertisers.

(courtesty of Neatorama)

Because it's not an either / or proposition...

Brendan Hodgson — Thu, 20 Mar 2008 12:48:00 GMT

When it comes to the inter-relationships between professional and amateur creators of content, the smart folks at Wharton have it right.

"Pitting amateur and professional content against each other makes a good storyline, but it's misleading to see them as fundamentally opposed," says Werbach. "User-generated content will never match The New York Times for the overall quality of coverage of the Iraq war, for example, but reading Iraqi blogs, or political blogs about the war, provides some perspectives you won't get from any newspaper." And, he adds, "There's no way a traditional encyclopedia will ever match the coverage of Wikipedia, because there are so many more contributors. On the other hand, while the quality of most Wikipedia entries is surprisingly good, there are times you want the certainty of a reference work that is professionally edited and vetted, or a smaller set of resources that have been pre-selected by experts."

For PR professionals, understanding the interplay between amateur and professional journalism is critically important. And as we counsel clients, we need to be sure that this interplay is reflected in our strategies as neither should work in total isolation of the other. Each offers a unique value that can further elevated when appropriately integrated.

Both bring value," says Kendall Whitehouse, senior director of IT at Wharton, in the article. "The latter brings quickness and a personal viewpoint and the former provides analysis and consistent quality (hmmm?). The world I want to live in includes healthy doses of both categories." (Amen)

But to think that this is simply about old and new media would be a mistake. As Joseph Turow, a professor at the University of Pennsylvania's Annenberg School for Communication, states: "The digital environment is putting an enormous responsibility on the consumer." No doubt. But I would also suggest that this notion of responsibility also touches organizations as well, although less from the consumer perspective of becoming better judges of content, and more from being the providers of authoritative and credible content. In the same way media have, for years, held governments and corporations to account, and as the media themselves are now being held to account by bloggers in terms of ensuring fair and accurate reporting, I wonder if it's not time for organizations to re-think their own responsibility to their own stakeholders - customers, employees, partners alike - in terms of addressing issues of inconsistency, inaccuracy and lack of context that could flow from traditional and new media alike.

For example, to assume that 300 words in a newspaper or a 30-second clip on television is enough to provide sufficient context and clarity around an issue of critical importance, no matter how accurate the reporting, is as flawed as putting one's faith and trust in an "anonymous" blogger. At the same time, many organizations have access to subject experts whose commentary could help bridge the link between these various media in a highly credible way.

And this, in my view, spells opportunity for many organizations who get it. Appropriate and transparent outreach, built on a commitment to authoritative rigour and timely, proactive engagement, can provide organizations with the means to play a more visible role in helping stakeholders and consumers make more discerning judgements on specific issues being discussed in both the mainstream and citizen media.

Update: What do I mean by this? Primarily, strategic use of digital tools to provide deeper insight on specific issues being discussed in both traditional and online media, to reinforce messages through substantiated examples supported by video or imagery, to showcase interviews with subject matter experts posted online, to provide FAQ's and visualizations that either expand upon, refute or clarify discussions taking place in the traditional or online media, or to support engagement in forums and sites external to the organization itself.

It's a role that organizations need to be prepared to step up to.

There's more to digital PR than social media

Brendan Hodgson — Sun, 16 Mar 2008 15:21:00 GMT

In recent months, I've become somewhat concerned by the overwhelming attention being paid to social media at the expense of other digital PR functions.

While social media is inherently an extension of that function, for the benefit of younger PR professionals and those who are still exploring the role that digital plays within a PR context, I thought it important to outline some other activities - in addition to what we are doing in the social media space - that are taking place within H&K Digital here in Canada.

The point being, that we need to avoid the same issue currently faced by our industry around the mistaken association that PR is synonymous with media relations and nothing more. We can't ignore that social media, like media relations, is becoming a key (and highly visible) subset of our respective offerings, overshadowing many other PR disciplines and areas of expertise.

But we have to avoid falling into that same trap, and yet do so intelligently. Clearly opportunities exist for forward-thinking PR firms and practitioners. But we must also be aware of the challenges related to finding those practitioners with the right skillsets required to undertake these types of assignments - namely the capacity to bridge the chasm that often separates the traditional PR practitioner with the digital specialist (not only the social media specialist) trained in areas such as functional design, information architecture and content management.

The opportunities exist. Here's a quick sampling of digital projects currently underway in our shop that extend beyond social media:

Auditing the electronic communications (EC) function of a federal government department, and providing recommendations on how to position the EC team to more effectively address emerging trends in digital communications, and the changing expectations of their internal clients.
Undertaking various training sessions, including conducting a half-day "Writing for the Web" course for another government department
Auditing the communications function of a large energy company as it relates to that organization's overall emergency response protocol, and making recommendations for digital integration within that function.
Providing strategic guidance on the development of a crisis dark site for another large corporation
Developing an over-arching online strategy (that will likely include social media) for a large technology firm's sponsorship of a major cultural event.
Supporting an organization's online efforts to reach out to, and effectively communicate with, both institutional and retail shareholders on a key issue.

To repeat: social media is undeniably a critical component of many campaigns that we now execute on behalf of clients. And while we regularly bake social media into our strategies and programs, and as we are increasingly engaged to create, feed into, or support various corporate blogging strategies, blogger outreach campaigns, and other social media initiatives, connecting ourselves too aggressively to that one segment of the digital universe could result in our being excluded from other more "traditional digital" opportunities... which would be a bad thing for PR as its seeks to re-define its role in the changing communications landscape.