@JasonFalls, from your example then my argument doesn’t apply because a) it’s been for companies that I’ve worked for (thus I am the voice) or b) it’s been agencies that we’ve hired to “immerse” themselves in our brand.

My point was this, we as PR practitioners get it and understand our role/function…but others (non-PR folks) don’t. When an engineer reads an article that the customer service manager “wrote” he believes that it was actually written by the CS manager because his name is on it. When you explain that it was really an agency who wrote it (with or without the CS manager’s input) there is an inherent moment of someone trying to comprehend what you just told them. It’s like telling someone I didn’t really write this post [I did, by the way…but am still waiting for someone to take me up on my offer of ghost blogging.

@AndrewSwenson, Nice try! Those are great points…and something I didn’t think about when writing this. It expands to all areas of business not just PR (and marketing or communications). I personally just have an issue with ghost blogging/tweeting, maybe it’s time to put that horse to rest.

@RobertFrench, there’s a reason why I swept with a broad brush and left aspects out… I wanted there to be enough room for conversation and other people’s viewpoint (we all come at this from different experiences, practices, and viewpoints).

I was not referring to PR as a whole… (even though the title implies that, blame my headline writer for that one. I jest. ).

My John Smith example is this: When someone reads the words in an article they expect that John Smith sat at a computer and wrote them. It’s that simple. And we know that is very often not the case at all. For the people on the receiving end, that is simply not authentic.

Slightly off topic, but an example, I’ve known my husband for 15 years and I’ve often “talked” for him (thinking I’d know what he’d say or want) and more than half the time I’ve been wrong in my assumption. My point is this, no matter how much we truly know someone we can’t know for any given minute or situation what that person would say or do in a particular. And with social media (and especially crisis communications) being that instantaneous, I think as PR professionals we need to start letting go and instead of talking for the client, counsel the client on why they should be the one talking directly to their constituents.

Honestly Robert, there’s a huge disconnect between what we teach and what happens in the real world. Personally, I try to stick to what PR should be…and maybe that’s my issue with what actually happens and it’s lack of authenticity.

@LeoGonzales, exactly! Credibility is key with public relations (no matter if it’s a crisis or not) and I think to Andrew’s point with more folks on the Internet and people losing faith in businesses and the government this is becoming a more important issue. Thanks for adding in the example of the tweets from your country. I think PR folks who set up these accounts don’t realize that the community does check into them and forms an opinion.

@NadineBonner, Love the lights analogy! Spin…such a bad connotation there. I get your point, but let me ask you this… is it okay to tweet or ghost blog for your Executive Director? If so, how would it come out? Like a brochure or as his own voice and thoughts? (Yes, playing devil’s advocate here because I am curious.)

@DavidReich, indeed, that’s part of PR’s job…helping people put their thoughts on paper. The difference with a speech though is that once those words leave the exec’s mouth, they belong to him or her and they will be surely be held accountable for them. It’s the same with a byline or press release too (always has been, but I think many organizations and their agencies overlook that fact).

@CHLow, I think that’s the crux of my issue, brands don’t talk…people do. And you bring up a very valid point in that a brand/business is seen as more of a cultural versus individualistic, that is true in many cases. But that’s where social media is coming into playing…people want to hear from people that support a brand. If it were a matter of just “listening” to a brand, we could all stick to traditional marketing/PR.

@KamiHuyse, I didn’t say fraud… I think it’s more about a subtle (or not so subtle) disappointment. And it is a societal shift…that’s why people go to Yelp to give a review because in their minds they are sharing their experience or what they experience to be the “truth” about an interaction with a brand (in their minds) with others. Like I said, even if a president didn’t write a speech, the minute those words come out of his/her mouth, ethically, they own them. They can’t say, “blame my speech writer.”

@MikeSmith, funny you should mention that…I asked my class if they care whether or not Britney or Oprah were really tweeting and they said no. Then again, they aren’t really on Twitter. (The irony.)

@Michaela (Dr. V), my example starts before it even hits the media. It’s an internal issue first. In 15 years I haven’t seen a journalist who has taken any press/news release and written it as their own (i.e. taking the words and putting their name on it). Maybe it happens; I’ve just never seen it happen.

Ah, you are correct. At its heart I have never believed PR (real PR that is!) to be inauthentic. What I believe to be inauthentic is what agencies and organizations have done with PR to bastardize it and make it inauthentic. And that is why I wrote the post.

I look at PR beyond the media and bloggers, for me it’s about building mutual beneficial relationships with ALL constituents. And it’s as much about listening as it is about talking, it’s about being part of the overall community as a trusted, authentic and reliable member.

Yes, the headline was meant to draw conversation and discussion…right or wrong, it’s what I do. Even as a professor, I don’t regurgitate out of a book. I make statements that get people to think and connect the dots beyond what they are being told by me or anyone else. And, because I also like to debate, I will say something off the cuff. I don’t want to create someone’s “ah, ha!” moment… I want them to come at it on their own.

I am sorry if I have disappointed you…it was not my intention.

@MarlaErwin, thank you!! You’ve smartly said what sometimes I struggle to make clear. Kudos to Whole Foods for keeping it real…it makes me love WF even more.

@Dana, that’s a good example and one I didn’t hear about. And it’s the same mindset that agencies use for justifying tweeting for their clients (i.e. “I live the brand!”). It doesn’t matter if you ‘live the brand’ you aren’t an employee and you aren’t talking for yourself (because if you were you’d be talking for your agency). I hope that makes sense. I am going with what Marla said… “Unless disappointing and angering your customers is part of some counter-intuitive PR strategy you’ve cooked up, that’s all the reason you need to rule out ever outsourcing your tweets.”

And like Kami and Andrew pointed out…it’s a societal shift and one that all organizations aren’t going to rush to. So, will there always be people ghost blogging/tweeting/etc. sure, of course. And will people care that it’s not “really” Starbucks… I don’t know. Do I care that an agency told me my local Starbucks is having a special via Twitter or do I only care that I am saving money?

@JonNewman, were you an agency spokesperson or an employee spokesperson? If it’s the former, my question would be this… why wouldn’t the organization speak for themselves?

@BridgetCavanaugh, you are talking about strategic PR counsel versus tactical PR. I get your analogy, but Twitter and social media are a reality. And many agencies and PR folks are pushing organizations to participate. Social media allows the PR pro to listen to and communicate with all constituents. But you can’t be active in a social community with the mindset that “this is only for the media or for a blogger that I am trying to get my message to.” It simply won’t work. And that’s why authenticity is very important…because an organization is talking to customers, prospects, investors, employees, competitors, etc. So while it might seem like American Idol, remember…viewers have a say on who wins and who doesn’t (that’s not the case with the Academy).

@JamieFavreau, I have nothing against bylines (or agencies helping to write bylines), they are an important aspect. My point is that if a company wants to have a byline, make sure the person’s name listed as the author actually wrote it or did a majority of the heavy lifting (and by that I mean it’s their thoughts, experience, etc and that they can talk to it). It’s a credibility and authenticity issue that I have with not doing that.

@MichaelBertoldi, hmmm, I’ve worked for lots of brands and have done social media for two. I can tell you, even as a marketer immersed day-to-day in the brand and products/services, I still couldn’t participate in the manner the customers expected because I didn’t have the deep technology background that our customer service, engineers, product developers, etc. had (perhaps the high-tech industry is a bit different than more consumer-oriented brands). And if I tried to, you better believe they called BS on it. It was my job to send them in the right direction for the information they needed…that is authentic.

So, as PR/marketing person for another brand I am curious to know how, as that brand, you can have a discussion with people about, say, your day at the office or your dog? You know, to truly build that relationship from the ground up…as a person.

@CHLow, yes, that is what I am saying…

@Susan, great examples…you’ve hit at the core of my point. I’ve cleaned up articles that subject matter experts have written…it’s their work, content, thoughts, etc. But I’ve also been involved when someone gets a brilliant idea for “press” writes an article and slaps someone’s name on it. That is what I am referring to. BTW, can I have a photo of you standing over a VP demanding authenticity?!

@ctmarcom, I am not asking for people to agree with me…but I guess I am thankful that some do, makes me feel less “out in left field.”

@RichieEscovedo, internal or external, I don’t think it matters. I would never presume to know exactly what’s going on inside a co-worker’s or executive’s head and speak on their behalf. I’ve been in situations where I am providing PR counsel and I “think” I know what’s best only to have an executive flip his position on me (messaging, context, etc.) and the team. It happens, because it’s human nature and because we PR folks aren’t always privy to pertinent information we need no matter how much we think we should be.

“Good practice takes the ideas and goals of the client and folds them into a collaborative effort.” Not sure that means a whole lot… I mean I could take a team of talented artists with a goal to make money, collaborate with them and produce a fake Picasso that is “truly representative” and help them sell it. Is that painting then authentic or fake? (Just playing devil’s advocate…)

@RustySpeidel, you know…that’s been something I’ve been thinking about too. What if byline articles said: “Authored by ABC Agency for John Smith, XYZ Company.”

How would readers of a magazine or newspaper feel about that? Would the impression be “this is automatic spin” (because an agency wrote it) or would they think “Wow, John must be busy.”

Just asked on Twitter…the comments are interesting. Apparently, a statement like that would cause lost credibility for the company for example. That’s a post in and of itself.

@SydneySarachan, “Therefore, we can’t expect brands to author their own tweets, post their own thought to Facebook, so on and so forth for lack of bandwidth a. and b. because then PR professionals are, basically, out of a job.”
You don’t give much credit to brands with that statement. Sorry, but I don’t think people who work for brands are that stupid or infantile. It also sounds very fearful. The fact of that matter is that PR professionals won’t be out of a job because they stop being a mouthpiece. There is SO much more work for them to do that it actually puts them in a more strategic counsel role. Don’t believe me? Read PR 2.0 by Deirdre Breakenridge. I might write a post on it because I have a slide that shows how a PR pros workload is doubled (and that doesn’t include ghost blogging/writing).

I disagree, if a client isn’t prepared for authentic interactions on social media platforms, then they shouldn’t engage. There are a ton of agencies that aren’t involved in the community either…they have just as much of a chance to screw things up for a brand. Just because they get Facebook doesn’t mean they get the community and how to interact with them…authentically. Ghost tweeting/blogging is inherently deceptive and fictitious…unless you state “This blog post has been written by ABC agency for XYZ Company.” If you still the President’s name on the post and he didn’t write it, you are asking for trouble, which makes no sense to me.

As well, social media isn’t new. It’s been around since the Internet… Understanding how to interact with customers, prospects, investors in a two-way conversation isn’t new either. Executives, sales, marketers, customer service, etc. have been doing it for decades.

@EstebanKolsky, um who is Lisa?

@KristenEscovedo, Trust me, I am proud to be in PR also. I’ve been doing PR and teaching it for 15 years (teaching for 7). The post title was for effect and perhaps a bit too dramatic in retrospect…

My only point is this: As traditional PR pros we get comfortable “writing thoughts” and “being the voice” for other people (i.e. bylines, press release quotes, etc). Now with social media tools at our disposal we want to continue to do the same thing online. And, like you said, it doesn’t work because people want to know that they are talking to Beth Harte, Kristen Escovedo or Richie Escovedo. And honestly, I don’t want to know that Richie has been tweeting for his boss Tom because Tom is too busy [it would crush me! ].

That said, if a company makes a decision that their Twitter or Facebook account will be all news or company information and no interaction that’s fine…ghost tweet away. Is that effective in an online community? Well, it depends on who you are. Is it a missed opportunity to engage, absolutely.

@PhilWrzesinski, thanks for adding clarification and another level to this. I totally agree with you that ‘Most people aren’t talented enough to put their thoughts out cohesively and persuasively.’ And that’s where traditional PR folks have helped in the past. But, as Esteban pointed out what happens when we find out John Smith is smarter in print than in real-life? I’ve experienced journalists picking up on that, which leads to an interview never leading to a story (it’s just painful to listen to). No matter how much you prep someone a journalist that knows the subject matter CAN tell that John Smith subject matter expert. I’ve had journalists hang up on us during an interview because they get pissed. I can’t blame them either. That’s a B2B example though…

Another thought, what happens when someone is ghost blogging for an executive and an executive is at a conference and someone says “Can you expand on what you meant in your post from 3 months ago?” A blank stare I am betting. Someone who writes their own posts wouldn’t have any issue with it.

@EdwardBoches, First, thanks for stopping by, glad you found us. Second…wow, just wow! Good for you! You are a taxpayer and you had every right to call them to the carpet for ghost tweeting. This is a perfect example of authenticity and why it’s important.

@Everyone, thank you so much for being gracious and sharing all of your viewpoints on this topic, I appreciate it!

Many apologies for the delay…I had a busy week that kept me away!

@NadineBonner, I was an in-house communications person for 15 years…never once in all the press releases, bylines, messaging etc. that I wrote for a handle full of executives was I ever 100% capable of capturing their exact voice, every single time. Perhaps it was the industry I was in (high-tech), but no matter how closely I worked with the executives or how well I knew the messaging (most of the time was the crafter of the message), it was virtually impossible to know “exactly” what executives (or others) were thinking at any given moment for any particular situation or what they would say as themselves. If you can capture an executives most inner thoughts without exception and spot on every, single time…kudos to you!

@JodyEchakowitz, thanks for making the bridge that some people seem to have missed with this conversation. I believe that PR pros aren’t used to the level of transparency that their constituents now expect. And the bigger challenge is that through social media you can’t always segregate which constituents are seeing your online messaging, campaigns, comments. That’s why authenticity and transparency (or at least translucency) are important.

@RachelKay, I think what you are referring to is a communications person making sure that a piece, whether it’s a byline or a blog post, is grammatically correct or properly formatter, etc. That is not what I am referring to. I disagree on one point…I think even if it’s a contest, it still needs to be authentic. What if someone has a question? What if they want to speak to an employee? I think people can tell when they are talking to someone who actually works at a company. And my basic premise is that if you introduce that inauthenticity once, what’s to say that it’s not done all the time? I’d have to wonder…

@CHLow, I think Coca-Cola is doing okay…but they need to identify who the tweeters are. Who is ^OP or ^AB? They should let people know…it’s an easy enough thing to put on the background.

@RichardKelleher, Point well taken (and great examples). Propoganda, spin, inauthenticity. My point is that all of that doesn’t work in PR 2.0. PR pros need to understand that. Ghost blogging for someone could be seen as propaganda or spin… Again Andrew Swenson nailed it, “…we now want more transparency in government, more transparency in trade, etc. Perhaps we’re sick of being mislead and betrayed both online and offline.”

@AnnieHeckenberger, I am trying to grown a new batch of PR trees because the old trees are about to fall over. And besides, PR falls under Marketing in my integrated world. But, I’ll add more marketing flavor, just for you.

@Steve, my post is 100% authentic because 1) I wrote it and 2) because I totally believe in what I wrote. (Otherwise I wouldn’t bothered.) I don’t think PR has been authentic for the most part. And as a practitioner, I’ve done my best to be authentic and have stuck to my ethics even when I knew it would land me in a heap of trouble. Sorry that you think I am being disingenuous…if you knew me personally, which you don’t, you’d know I am one of the most genuine people online and offline. I don’t drink kool-aid to appease people.

“the quality of your content matters much more to me than whether you wrote it.”

You can’t have it both ways. The content is quality (I hope!) because *I* wrote it. If I gave this blog over to other people to write for me, they couldn’t do it. Simply because they AREN’T me, they don’t know what makes me tick, they can’t copy my tone, right? I just don’t get why this is such a hard concept…

@TonyDeFazio, if you missed the point of this post, how about taking some time to read the following:

Groundswell, Li & Bernoff
PR 2.0, Breakenridge
Putting the Public Back in PR, Solis & Breakenridge
The New Rules of Marketing & PR, Meerman Scott
The New Influencers, Gillan
Marketing to the Social Web, Weber
Tactical Transparency, Holtz & Havens

I could go on… but that should be enough to get you started in understanding the discussion and debate here.

And yes, the PR profession does need to be called out because it’s broken. There have been numerous on-going conversations around this area and many of us (professionals and professors) are working on making the PR profession better by advancing it with thought leadership. Take some time to seek out the information and educate yourself. Reprimanding me on my blog reflects more on you than it does me…you might want to keep that in mind for the next time you leave a comment for someone.

@PromotionalProducts, have to disagree with you on this one. Deceit and ethics have nothing to do with this…just ask Dell or Comcast, they weren’t being deceptive or unethical and still came under a fire storm. They chose to NOT put an inauthentic PR spin on their issues and chose to be public and authentic…their public image is on the rise and it has nothing to do with traditional PR spin.