Just as The New York Times (Jason Blair), CBS (Dan Rather) and Reuters (fauxtography) have shamed the mainstream media, the Edelman public relations firm has shamed the blogosphere. According to The Writing on the Wall (quoting Online Media Daily), the PR operation has “fessed up” to creating so-called “flogs” (phony blogs) for promotional purposes. One of them has the name “Working Families for Wal-Mart.”
Now I am not pro or con Wal-Mart per se. But I am decidedly against this misuse of blogs. It undercuts the transparency that we are trying to achieve. [FULL DISCLOSURE: In the interest of transparency, Pajamas Media earlier this year had discussion with Edelman about public relations representation that did not pan out. They did not then mention creating any "flogs" for us. If they had, I can assure you we would have rejected it out of hand.]
Of course, this kind of pseudo-publicity ends up backlfiring for Wal-Mart and for all of us who wish to see blogs thrive intellectually and commercially. For a good analysis of what this means, see Tom Hespos’ Wal-Mart: Blazing the Trail to Distrust. [ANOTHER FULL DISCLOSURE: Hespos' Underscore Marketing works with Pajamas on our business side.]
BTW, J ohn Tierney at the NYT has written some interesting defenses of Wal-Mart in other (non-blogging) areas. Alas this is behind the paper’s fuddy-duddy “select” firewall. (Note to Sulzberger: In the words of Peter Robinson, “Tear down that wall!” It’s worth a shot with your stock going into the toilet.)
UPDATE: Edelman “defends” himself in Advertising Age. Hespos responds.
PJM Home
Pajamas Media appreciates your comments that abide by the following guidelines:
1. Avoid profanities or foul language unless it is contained in a necessary quote or is relevant to the comment.
2. Stay on topic.
3. Disagree, but avoid ad hominem attacks.
4. Threats are treated seriously and reported to law enforcement.
5. Spam and advertising are not permitted in the comments area.
The clause regarding "hate speech" has been deleted because readers criticized it as being too loosely defined. We agreed.
These guidelines are very general and cannot cover every possible situation. Please don't assume that Pajamas Media management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment. We reserve the right to filter or delete comments or to deny posting privileges entirely at our discretion. If you feel your comment was filtered inappropriately, please email us at story@pajamasmedia.com.
9 Comments
1. rjschwarz:The real question is who thought anyone would be interesteding a blog called the “Working Families for Wal-Mart.”
Actual working families of wal-mart would either (a) coopt the blog pretty quick (b) spot it was phoney and everyone else would skip past such a dull sounding site.
I guess it might be useful to create fictional sound-bites for our lazy media but that hardly seems as if it would be worth the effort when the media often prints up corporate press releases directly.
Oct 20, 2006 - 11:34 am 2. williamhallowell:Find out how other Americans feel. Our foreign policy index is an amazing way to gage public opinion about American foreign policy and the current state of affairs, and from the way things look, the public may just be at a tipping point. Read onÖ
Here at Public Agenda, weíve created a new tool to track Americansí opinions on foreign policy issues, providing a basis for political commentary. Similar to the Consumer Confidence Index, the Foreign Policy Anxiety Indicator provides policy makers, journalists and ordinary citizens with the public’s overall comfort level with America’s place in the world and current foreign policy.
An essential tool updated twice a year, the Indicator will consistently provide much-needed information on the publicís perception of more than two dozen aspects of international relations.
In a world strewn with violence and highly-charged international issues, Americans are broadly uneasy about U.S. foreign policy. The September 2006 shows the Foreign Policy Anxiety Indicator at 130 on a scale of 0 to 200, where 0 is the most confident, 200 the most anxious and 100 neutral.
Eight in 10 Americans feel the world is becoming a more dangerous place for Americans, yet they’re also skeptical about most of the possible solutions, such as creating democracies or global development. Only improved intelligence gathering and energy independence have substantial support, with energy firmly established as a national security problem
for the public.
In fact, the public lacks confidence in many of the measures being taken to ensure Americaís security. Less than 33% of Americans give the U.S. government an ìAî or a ìBî grade for its execution of the following foreign policy issues: reaching goals in Iraq and Afghanistan, maintaining good relationships with Muslim countries and protecting U.S. borders from illegal immigration. And these are just a few of the findings of the survey.
These are some of the other startling findings:
- 83 percent say they are worried about the way things are going for the United States in world affairs (35 percent worry “a lot”, with an additional 48 percent saying they worry “somewhat.”)
- 79 percent say the world is becoming more dangerous for the United States and the American people
- 69 percent say the United States is doing a fair or poor job in creating a more peaceful and prosperous world
- 64 percent say the rest of the world sees the United States negatively
- 58 percent say U.S. relations with the rest of the world are on the wrong track
Want to learn more? Go to http://www.publicagenda.org/foreignpolicy/index.cfm to download the report.
Public Agenda is a nonprofit, nonpartisan group devoted to public opinion and public policy. The confidence in U.S. Foreign Policy Index is developed in cooperation with Foreign Affairs with support from the Hewlett and Ford foundations.
Oct 20, 2006 - 11:53 am 3. JK Ribera:Evidently the above commenter has forgotten his Shakespeare – “Brevity is the soul of wit”,etc.
Oct 20, 2006 - 12:47 pm 4. triticale:My wee wifey and I constitute a working family. Wal-Mart’s always low prices are a great benefit to us; a large percentage of those items we purchase new are purchased there. I have in the past posted on my own blog favorable statements about the company.
Oct 20, 2006 - 9:19 pm 5. Deagle:NYT…for goodness sakes, keep the wall!
Oct 20, 2006 - 11:31 pm 6. John Moore ( Useful Fools ):The Public Agenda poster appears to be a blog spammer, the sort of parasite that infests the blog world as it does the email world. The post looked to me like nothing more than an advertisement.
Shame.
Oct 20, 2006 - 11:54 pm 7. Rhod:Hallowell is clearly one of those nitwits who thinks reality is the same as opinion about reality, and that opinion is suggestive of solutions. Geocentrists, meet the pollster.
Oct 21, 2006 - 4:24 am 8. Terrye:I went to Walmzrt today to buy groceries, the place was packed. I don’t think the shoppers there really care about who blogs about what.
Oct 21, 2006 - 12:49 pm 9. Roger:I left the idiotic post from this “Hallowell” character because I thought it was funny this kind of blog spam appeared here under the Edleman story. Fitting, somehow. Not time I’ll delete.
Oct 21, 2006 - 3:33 pm