0.020: do corporate blogs = marketing collateral?

Seems my investigative blogging was picked up by a couple of tech journalists this week, and suddenly I have a broader readership. Props to both Chris Mellor and Beth Pariseau for the traffic, if not necessarily for their perspectives .

I know that many of you won't believe this, but setting the record straight wasn't the primary objective of my articles on blogketing. My intent really was (and still is) to spotlight the notion of Corporate Blogging as a marketing tool, and whether or not it should be held up to the same credibility and liability standards as any other form of marketing or advertising. Over the past week, I've gotten feedback on both sides of that coin, both directly and even in a couple of other blogs.

My position is pretty clear - I think Corporate Blogs (the ones that show up on a company's web site under the company's logo) are just as much marketing collateral as everything else on those web sites, and thus are to be held to the same level of accuracy and professionalism. This despite any disclaimers that may appear on the blog - if the company is paying to promote the blog, they are by definition endorsing the views of the blogger.

The alternate position is best summed up by this bit of (edited) feedback that I received this week: "Everyone in the blogosphere knows, or at least should know, that a blog is just the un-edited voice of a single person, and many posts are made without spell-checking, fact-checking or grammar-checking. [...] Blog posts are not technology publications, magazine articles, press releases, or other collateral that follow a more rigorous editing process."

What do you think?

Opinion Polls & Market Research

<Direct link to this poll on Vizu>

Feel free to comment, either here on on the poll itself.

Comments

[Open Systems guy]

I think that when bloggers use their blogs as soapboxes, they can limit their readership. Bloggers who have a certain degree of neutrality tend to attract more people.

That said, the biggest benefit of blogging as a media is the fact that it's two way- opinions can be traded and debated. Even in a soapbox blog, that leads to a certain level of neutrality.

Either way, I believe that the only person who can say what should be on a blog is the blogger. Official company communications are different- they don't offer anything other than their side, with no forum for debate.

[Dan Rumney]

I disagree with Barry on this. I think his conclusion that companies endorse the contents of blogs they pay to support would be sound, were it not for the fact that company's don't support *individual* blogs. In the main, they support a blogging framework and encourage (or at the very least, allow) their employees to set up blogs to express their own opinions.
It's true that these employees must adhere to certain conduct guidelines, but a 'good' company will relatively hands-off, editorially speaking.
Therefore, I don't think that it's valid to conclude that a company endorses every opinion expressed on its blogging site and therefore blogging material should be considered the same as marketing material.

BUT, I think it would be foolish to completely ignore the fact that the person expressing an opinion works for a specific company. If that person is in a position of sufficient influence then it may be fair to conclude that any opinion they express on their blog will, ultimately, have some impact on the company's future decisions. However, if, as a reader and buyer, you make your decisions based solely on comments in a blog then more fool you.

Ultimately, I think the contents of a blog can prove a very useful research tool, but don't treat it as a company's official position.

[Nigel Poulton]

Im very much of the opinion that blogging should be fun. I blog because I enjoy blogging and I enjoy storage. I dont take too long writing my posts and Im sure you and many of the "corporate bloggers" are the same. If I felt my blogs were under a microscope Id have to take longer and then probably wouldn't have the time.

I also blogging has been great in opening new ways to communicate with people and companies that were otherwise not available.

Of course you need to be careful what you say - you dont want to mislead people or lose your job ;-)

Anyone with an ounce of common sense knows that a company sponsored blog is different from other official company materials such as press releases etc.

Nobody will go and buy a USP-V based on what Hu says in his blog and Im sure nobody will buy a DMX-4 based on yours. In fact the only person who appears to spend a lot of time reading Hu's blog is ......well.....probably you ;-)

[the storage anarchist]

Nigel - I have to admit that I haven't figured a way to measure the mass of my common sense, so I'm not sure if that insult was intended for me or not 8^0

But I do know that there are a lot of people who agree with me that corporate bloggers shouldn't be allowed to get away with making misleading assertions about their products or with casting unverifiable aspersions against their competition in their blogs. Call it truth-in-advertising, appropriate business conduct, or just plain old common sense, but many agree that if you blog under the shadow of your corporate logo, you can't just make stuff up and present it as fact.

You and I, on the other hand, can say whatever we like (well, almost). Personally, I still try to be respectful and honest in my assessments, as do most of us. But IMHO, a corporate blogger can't hide half-truths and marketing BS behind the sheild of his blogs' disclaimer.

And I do hope you're not right about one thing - several customers and prospects have written me with appreciation for my blog. I sincerely hope that some of them do buy a DMX based in part on the topics presented and discussed here.

ttfn!