The Hobson & Holtz Report - Podcast #661: July 23, 2012

Content summary: Two new FIR Interviews posted: Marcus Nelson, founder of Addvocate, and Kevin Delaney, Editor in Chief of Quartz; interviews this week scheduled with Philip Sheldrake and Stephen Waddington about ‘Share This: The Social Media Handbook for PR Professionals’ from the CIPR, and with Chris Sorek, IABC’s new Executive Director; BPA update from Christie Goodman; Ragan promo; News That Fits: fake news gets more subtle and damaging: the example of fake Shell in particular; Dan York asks why NBC has such a legacy approach to enabling him to watch the Olympic Games; the Media Monitoring Minute with CustomScoop; the social Olympic Games 2012: experimenting, control, the explosion of the social web, the compelling drive to share, and more; listener comments including Bryan Person on Instagram and Carmen Sognonvi on the mobile web; SEO for PR gets more complicated; TemboSocial promo; Michael Netzley reports from Singapore on a "causal" relationship between peer-to-peer influence and the likelihood of someone buying a product; music from Giles; and more.

Get FIR:

Messages from our sponsors: FIR is brought to you with Lawrence Ragan Communications, serving communicators worldwide for 35 years, www.ragan.com; Save time with the CustomScoop online clipping service: sign up for your free two-week trial, at www.customscoop.com/fir; and TemboSocial (formerly Pollstream): helping you transform your communications goals into exciting strategies that will enable you to engage, educate and inform your customers and employees online, pollstream.com/fir/.

For Immediate Release: The Hobson & Holtz Report for July 23, 2012: An 86-minute podcast recorded live from Wokingham, Berkshire, England, and Concord, California, USA.


Links to websites, blog posts and other content we discuss in the show are posted as Delicious bookmarks to facilitate your connection with the discussions and sharing of that content.

FIR Show Notes links
Names of blogs, individuals, companies and organizations we discussed or mentioned in the show are posted to the FIR Show Notes pages at The New PR Wiki. You can contribute time stamps – see the show notes home page for info.

FIR on Friendfeed
Share your comments or questions about this show, or suggestions for future shows, in the FIR FriendFeed Room. You can also email us at fircomments@gmail.com; call the Comment Line at +1 206 338 7960 (North America), +44 20 3239 9082 (Europe), or Skype: fircomments; comment at Twitter: twitter.com/FIR. You can email your comments, questions and suggestions as MP3 file attachments, if you wish (max. 3 minutes / 5Mb attachment, please!). We’ll be happy to see how we can include your audio contribution in a show.

To stay informed about occasional FIR events (eg, FIR Live), sign up for FIR Update email news.

So, until Monday July 30…

Posted by neville on 07/23 at 11:24 AM

  1. Thanks, Shel and Neville, for fixing the comment capability. I was bummed when my comment didn’t make it through largely because it was hands down the most eloquent and articulate I’ve been in my life. And now, that moment has passed. Though, it did happen here so we can all bask in that thought. :)

    I’ll try to recapture some of the magic of my original comment, though.

    Trickery, fabrication and virtualized as this entire campaign was, I think there is one aspect that hasn’t been discussed at length. That is the role of the journalist in this coverage. I’m not so much concerned that the reporters covered the initial campaign, or that they had to then cover the fact that it was fabricated and that they’d been duped. I’m more intrigued by the position Greenpeace willing put the journalist in.

    It speaks volumes about the evolution of digital communication and campaign tactics that the journalist is expendable to the point that Greenpeace counted on their participation in this campaign in a way that gambled future journalist interest in Greenpeace activities. Clearly, Greenpeace recognizes journalists, while credible and trusted, are but a mere part of the digital ecosystem. The story didn’t need journalists for it to spread. However, the backstory of the duped journalists helped keep the story alive that much longer. You can’t pay for the kind of media exposure Greenpeace attained.

    As part of their Shell campaign, Greenpeace apparently thumbed their noses at the media folk who have helped them in the past (and on this campaign) by putting them in a terrible position. They did so knowing they no longer need the media. It was a defining moment in many respects.

    Anyway, that was the essence of my original comment even if it didn’t have the magic spark this time around.

    Perhaps a greater concern is the fact that the fabrication of crises and the fact crises now take place in virtualized space should be a wake-up call to organizations and governments around the world. A new era of activism is upon them. You can read some of those thoughts here and a look at the extended media coverage they achieved here.

    Posted by Mark Blevis  on  08/06  at  01:19 PM

Name:

Email:

Location:

URL:

Smileys

Remember my personal information

Notify me of follow-up comments?

Submit the word you see below:


Next entry: FIR Interview: Philip Sheldrake and Stephen Waddington on ‘Share This’

Previous entry: FIR Interview: Kevin Delaney, Editor in Chief, Quartz

<< Back to main