Can't we all find a way to get along?

When I first started in this industry, I quickly learnt that the average ego size in PR is disproportionate to the rest of the world. Now it appears that PR bloggers are a representative sample of this particular universe.

Back in October, Steve Rubel put out a call to arms to some of the larger PR agencies (including ours) to brainstorm "some joint action initiatives to immerse PR pros" in the practicalities (as opposed to the theories) of social media. He immediately drew criticism by his "iron curtain" approach.

Clearly undeterred, Steve has had a bylined article published in PR Week US directing readers to the conversation beginning on The NewPR Wiki, which I was happy to contribute to (please note, I didn't ask to be invited but nor did I feel it appropriate to decline).

Now Constantin Basturea has weighed in by starting a separate wiki page (also on The NewPR Wiki) for those who feel "excluded from the conversation". The implication is that - by participating in Steve's initiative - we want to exclude and ignore other points of view. This could not be further from the truth.

Of course, everyone is perfectly entitled to create their own wikis, or even just talk about the issues on their own blogs, but this is all getting a little bit silly.

Those of us who are willing to share our experience and knowledge with others in our industry are just left sitting in the middle, unsure who to side with. We either continue to contribute to Steve's initiative and run the risk of making others feel excluded and ignored. Or we switch our allegiance to Constantin because, at the end of day, the size of the agency doesn't really matter. We could, I suppose, contribute to both but that just seems like a waste of effort. I doubt that others will want to listen to both conversations either, thus deepening the digital divide in PR.

Either way, none of this seems particularly grown up.

The only logical solution is therefore to do neither, until we can all find a way to get along. In the mean time, if you want some insight into what's happening in our agency, I suggest you add our Collective Conversation feed to your RSS reader.

Published 28 November 2005 14:09 by Niall Cook

Filed under: Miscellaneous

Comments

• 

  anu gupta said:

  In that case, why not just open up the original wiki page to all participants, rather than a selected few ?
  
  There may not be an intention to ignore and exclude other points of view, but how can that not be a result if only 5 (or so) people are invited to join ? Kinda defeats the "we get 75% of social media" message, doesn't it !
  
  So - why not have a word with Steve, and remove the need to be invited and have a password to contribute - that seems like a fairly simple way to sort this out
  
  November 28, 2005 17:26
• 

  Niall Cook said:

  Anu, I agree.
  
  I have been in contact with both Steve and Constantin by email today to see how we can resolve.
  
  At the end of the day, it seems that Steve - as initiator - needs to make the decision about opening up access.
  
  Whether or not he is willing to is yet to be seen.
  November 28, 2005 17:33
• 

  Constantin Basturea said:

  Niall, I'm surprised by your interpretation; I thought I explained my motives in the emails we exchanged today.
  
  Please allow me to clarify a couple of things:
  
  - It was clear from the beginning that people who are not invited to participate will be unhappy about it; I didn’t invented this: it’s all in the comments and trackback posted back in October, and reignited recently.
  
  - Since people asked “what about us?” and since Steve’s project is hosted by the NewPR Wiki, I thought I have to respond to these questions by -at least- offering a discussion space for those who felt that their ideas are ignored just because they’re not working in large PR agencies. It’s people’s choice if they want to use it or not.
  
  - I never implied that the people participating in Steve’s initiative have the intention to exclude and ignore other points of view. That thought never crossed my mind.
  
  Anyway, I'm glad to see that Steve has decided to open the access to the project.
  
  November 28, 2005 19:17
• 

  Niall Cook said:

  Constantin,
  
  I'm not questioning your motives. They are admirable (as are Steve's). And thanks for your clarifications.
  
  I stand by my interpretation though, although it was written before the exchange of emails I saw today.
  November 28, 2005 20:30
• 

  Jeremy Pepper said:

  Let's be realistic - this will likely die on the vine, because it was as much ego-driven as driven by altruism. Probably more so.
  
  It's too bad, because such conversations and idea pools are needed, but they need to be lead by others.
  December 3, 2005 08:40