Thanks for stopping by and sorry about that lack of clarification on your blog posting. I cleaned it up right away.

Cheers,

Daniel

Great post!

It’s great to see the Edelman debate spinning off into new directions. Yours is one well worth following.

On reflection “Letting go” is, I think, the last thing a company needs.

I agree wholeheartedly that blogs are a liberal expression of current issues but at corporate level, they do need guidance. The whole concept of company blogs adhering to WOMMA is to provide guidelines that everyone representing them online need to follow.

The point is not the application of standards which, once properly up and running, are very easy to apply, as Dell continues to demonstrate. On the contrary, like you said, it’s a question of getting those standards across to all areas of the corporate mindset, creating unity between departments that, prior to 2.0, perhaps had only the brand name in common.

Another, often overlooked issue is the geographical barriers. In 2006 Edelman carved a groove in the blogosphere so deep that they are almost solely responsible for the creation of any number of the new “global blogging standards” being wielded about.

And here’s where it gets a bit fuzzy, for those “global” standards are in fact a reflection of commonly-accepted geographical standards, with America, its numerous social models and beliefs sitting comfortably at the top of this particular tree.

Let me explain this thought before I get flamed.

I work for Acer (EMEA), and the recent Edelman scandal/project (delete at will) you mention is an excellent example of how things get warped the further out the message journeys.

Within the IT industry, of the top five PC vendors (let’s leave Apple out of the equation for once), only three have blogs (Dell, HP and Lenovo). Acer and Fujitsu Siemens (as far as I’m aware) do not.

Those that do, live in a world in which 2.0 is very much present on the daily agenda. Those that don’t have strong European influences at the helm and as such, take a little longer to react to online events. There’s nothing wrong with European influences (of which I’m a fully-paid up member), it’s just that the impact blogging has on mainstream media and, as a result, corporate policy over here is not quite as pronounced as say, in the US.

The Edelman example is a case in point. Edelman consults for Microsoft and came up with what must have looked like an amazing Joint Marketing Program (JMP) with AMD to get Vista in front of some serious online sneezers just in time for Christmas. Microsoft orders several dozen Ferrari PCs from Acer, makes sure everything’s working properly and sends out a delightful package to the lucky few.

The fall out was, as you rightly pointed out, inevitable and when the fire broke out, Microsoft and Acer were accused of bribing the world.

But look again at the history of events. Acer supplied the PCs (bought and paid for). They weren’t directly involved in the campaign yet are constantly associated with the scam. You yourself refer to it as the “Vista-Acer campaign”.

Without its own blog, Acer wasn’t able to respond. Yet, in a pre-blog mindset, why the hell go to the trouble of sending out a press release protesting your innocence when your products are getting so much free publicity?

Now before I’m accused of going off topic, shortly afterwards, Acer had its own little scare with the ActiveX vulnerability. We were listening and we caught it (and dealt with it) promptly, but it was PR and marketing that took care of it. Even if it had its own blog, there would have to be an official position (PR) backed up by its management (bloggers). Any other alternative is, frankly, foolish.

Eric Klintz over at HP blogs “freely” on his HP Marketing Excellence blog and we all know Lionel keeps everything in check over at Dell so the idea of companies abandoning their long-guarded media channel standards so they can embrace what is essentially just another one is way off the mark.