Subscribe: Comments on The Wages of Spin: A code of conduct - would that do?
http://wagesofspin.blogspot.com/feeds/115697419418954843/comments/default
Added By: Feedage Forager Feedage Grade C rated
Language: English
Tags:
agree extent  ceo  edit wikipedia  edit  entry  extent prs  good  information  issue  line  media  prs  public  wikipedia entry  wikipedia 
Rate this Feed
Rate this feedRate this feedRate this feedRate this feedRate this feed
Rate this feed 1 starRate this feed 2 starRate this feed 3 starRate this feed 4 starRate this feed 5 star

Comments (0)

Feed Details and Statistics Feed Statistics
Preview: Comments on The Wages of Spin: A code of conduct - would that do?

Comments on The Wages of Spin: A code of conduct - would that do?





Updated: 2016-05-18T08:33:45.241+00:00

 



Good debate. There is a real issue here. It is abo...

2006-09-07T17:02:00.000+00:00

Good debate. There is a real issue here. It is about trust. Who trusts the public relations agency, head of PR or Corporate Affairs.

That is why I think we need the institutions like CIPR (Farrington fun aside).

We also need to be ready to stand up and be counted and that will make a many of you unpopular (I am already but can be dismissed as grumpy old man).



I believe that wikipedia is allowing PR profession...

2006-09-05T22:42:00.000+00:00

I believe that wikipedia is allowing PR professionals or anyone for that matter to write in comments about entries. That's at least provides some mechanism for discussion.

As for a standard, I think a few good case studies on the problems that arise from clients altering text in this way, might serve as the best way to convince clients such action is not a good idea.



Just noticed your blog looks a lot like mine, you ...

2006-08-31T15:09:00.000+00:00

Just noticed your blog looks a lot like mine, you copycat!

Back to what I was saying, I don't think any restrictions should be made upon wikipedia because PRs do try to influence any main source of information im favour of their client.

Take any big trend at the moment. When people want information what do they do? They search for it in google. What are PRs currently trying to do? Influence search engine rankings by making press releases keyword-heavy. There is such a much larger issue at hand here and at the end of the day, end-users (like those on DIGG/Delicious) can correct any obvious mistake.

For Wikipedia, anyone that contributes or edits an entry has a motivation for doing so. For the best part, the information they contribute will have been gleaned from articles/shows in mainstream media. Articles/shows which could just have easily been influenced by PR in the first place.



Is it OK for a CEO to edit the Wikipedia entry of ...

2006-08-31T11:40:00.000+00:00

Is it OK for a CEO to edit the Wikipedia entry of his / her company? Is it OK for the CEO to delegate this task to someone else, perhaps an in-house PRO?

If it's alright (and it surely must be) for a company to edit its own Wikipedia entry, where does one draw the line - and how clearly defined is the line - between acceptable self-editing and the kind of "Wiki for sale" outfit upon which we all instinctively frown?

The 'mainstream' agency world seems to sit somewhere in this grey area, and the sooner we define our own parameters the better - before someone else does.

From my Public Affairs standpoint there are direct parallels with the ongoing debate into the need (or not) for the lobbying sector to either be regulated or to self-regulate - and whether / how this should apply not just to agencies but to in-house lobbyists, public policy lawyers and anyone else who seeks to influence the policy process.

Oops, this was meant to be a brief comment but has mushroomed somewhat.



Good point Richard,It does seem that with this iss...

2006-08-31T11:13:00.000+00:00

Good point Richard,

It does seem that with this issue there are many 'sub-issues' that could even be major issues in their own right.

The use of Wikipedia I think is again based on how you view Wikipedia. There are people who rely on it for fact. Although I appreciate that nothing is bias-free, something doesn't sit right with me when the full facts are denyed to the public on purpose.



I agree with this to an extent.Yet to say PRs shou...

2006-08-31T08:57:00.000+00:00

I agree with this to an extent.

Yet to say PRs should not be allowed to edit wikipedia when they are willingly, and constantly, trying to release 'select' information into mainstream media seems a little haphazard.

So yes, there do need to be guidelines laid down that draws the line, but the line must be drawn between through all media once again.