And finally...

Having blogged for the past few weeks, I think I have a far better understanding about how blogging can be of benefit in PR. I was amazed at the number and diverse opinions in blogs which cover so many different subjects.

There is an infinite amount of space and an infinite amount of information on the Internet and it is difficult to comprehend how to best use it. In the future different PR campaigns, though, will have to use different PR 2.0 tools and target audiences with key messages in many different ways.

Everything is also changing so quickly with new products and ideas thrown up almost every day. This means that PRs will need to be ready to match these changes and adapt to new ways of working. Some things, though, never change. This week's data found on hard drives is depressingly familiar to the old newspaper stories about personal information being dumped in landfills or discovered on waste ground. There is now so much information so easily available that it seems it will ever harder to keep it secure.

I am frequently amazed at the personal information, including pictures, phones numbers, details about friends, etc that people willing give over on social networking sites. No one can control the amount of data out there and that is what, in many ways, defines the Internet.

Even this very limited experience of blogging has shown me the way blogging makes people confront such issues. This may be my last post here but I don't think it will be long before I reappear blogging somewhere else.

Wired up to YouTube

YouTube has become such a part of our every day life that even the prime minister now thinks it is one of the best ways to deliver messages to his key audiences.




Although on reflection he will probably wish he hadn't made that one.

YouTube is an incredible resource hosting millions of videos from all corners of the globe. It also offers a space for anyone to store or share videos with their friends. There are also free tools on the Internet so that anyone, even a simple PR student can make up a video and post on YouTube or in a blog. Here is one I made earlier...It is not meant to be taken too seriously.

Now here's a new thing...

Where's the hype? The drive to be the next Google seems to be always upon us. The power of the Internet to drive change more quickly than at any time in the past is seen in the extraordinary success that is Google. Yet it is only 13 years since two students started the research which led to Google being set up. Yet now Google is so ever-present that is already been accepted as a verb; the most popular search engine is the world's leading brand, valued at more than $100m, a third more than Microsoft; anyone who has ever searched for anything on the Internet cannot imagine a life without Google. It is a dream company for a PR.

So what is the next big thing on the Internet? Well, if I knew the answer then I would taking home some of the Google billions. This week the BBC reports that the latest search tool, Wolfram Alpha, "could be as important as Google". By searching within sites it brings answer to your webpage, rather than a series of sites as in a Google search. The first thing I notice is the caution in the BBC's "could", which always makes the cynical journalist in me equate to could not.

However, what Google has also shown to all web companies is the power to innovate to remain ahead of the competition. Google has never been content to just rake in the cash; part of its huge success has been its ability to add value every time your blink. Google News, Mail, Tools, Blogger, Analytics ... the list is almost endless. If I had to put money on where the next big search engine development will be, then I would back it being led by Google. If, as in the past they have missed a trick, then they have just moved in and bought up the latest technology. So perhaps Stephen Wolfram can look forward to a bumper payday from Google.

Evening all

Having worked for the police, I was pleased to see a police officer winning the Orwell prize for his anonymous blog, NightJack. All too often police are in the news for the wrong reasons and police officers are more angry than anyone about the behviour of the tiny minority of officers who fail to keep up the very high standards we so rightly expect of them.

Police officers are not known for their great communication skills, so it is good to read in the blog what life is really like on the beat. This is the best PR the police can have...from the horse's mouth.

This also shows how Web 2.0 tools can empower ordinary men or women to speak to the majority. More power to this PC's PC.

Taking the twitter

Want to know the latest on the Budget? Then Twitter was the place to be this week with Channel Four offering to keep you up to touch with the breaking news. This shows how seriously PRs need to take Twitter; everyone from journalists to the Government is now using it.

Not everyone takes it seriously, though. Here's a piece of fun I came across on YouTube. Enjoy.

From: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BeLZCy-_m3s

Why are academics so afraid of Wikipedia?

Wikipedia is without doubt one of the modern wonders of the world. Since wikis were invented back in 1994 by Howard G. ‘Ward’ Cunningham, a US computer programmer, Wikipaedia has been an incredible success. I also think it is one of the wonders of the web that you can still go to Cunningham's original wiki.

Launched as recently as 15 January 2001, Wikipedia now has more than 2 million articles and is the largest encyclopaedia in history. It is reviewed continuously by everyone and libellous, criminal an copyright material is removed. While there will always be some arguments over its accuracy, the same can be said for many of the academic books I have read.


Wikipedia is the only book I have ever read which warns me it needs more citations to verify what is on it. It also had far more citations than any other book I have ever looked at. So why are academics so critical of it? Could it perhaps be because Wikipedia threatens their own authority?

Picture: http://ventnorblog.com/copy_images/flat-earth.jpg

In previous eras there were academics who refused to accept the blindingly obvious as the above picture reminded me. Or perhaps the earth is flat, after all.

Twittering about worms

PR clients are always quite rightly concerned first and foremost about their reputation. Twitter has taken a battering this weekend after a worm was placed in the site taking users to StalkDaily.com.

This was set up a by a 17-year-old American student, Michael Mooney, who said he did it out of boredom. He has even published a web page explaining why and how he did it. Twitter has had reputation issues before and has been slow to act when pressed by people being misrepresented on its site. If a student can cause this much chaos just imagine how much trouble a real professional hacker can create.

If Twitter allows worms and such misrepresentation to infect its day-to-day working this will hugely damage Twitter's standing. This could really curtail whats seemed to be the unstoppable rise of Twitter.

If I can't trust whether a Twitter has really come from someone it claims to be, or it could infect my machine, then I for one will not want to use Twitter. I am sure I will not be the only one.

Is this the age of the political blogger?

Even the most powerful communicators can get it wrong at times. Damian McBride, now a former adviser to Gordon Brown at No. 10, will no doubt be wishing he had never suggested blogging about Tory politicians to his erstwhile friend Derek Draper who runs LabourList, a blog for Labour party supporters. For those of us with long memories, Derek Drapper was also caught up in a much earlier Labour row back in 1998 about lobbying.

Picture from: http://www.sxc.hu/photo/1022168

McBride should never have forgotten where and who he works for and the immense influence his job gave him. It is always easy to communicate but not always necessary to do it.

However, for Paul Staines it is a massive success for him and his Guido Fawkes' blog. In the UK political bloggers have taken a long time to become popular or influential, unlike the US, where blogs dominated the recent presidential election and President Obama raised most of his funds via Internet sites or various types.

If, as Harold Wilson famously said, a week is a long time in politics, then in then new cyberworld bloggers will speed that up to make just a few minutes a long time in politics.
Perhaps this could be the age of the political blogger.

When a private life is all too public

The Internet is now at the centre of the always uneasy relation between journalists and PR professionals. Having worked on both sides, I know only too well the problems each side can have with the other.  In the past few days I have been reading Deirdre Breakenridge's PR2.0: New Media, New Tools, New Audiences. 

She talks about some of the tools now available to help identify the best specialist journalists to target for particular campaigns; the information can include the usual contact numbers, email addresses, deadline details, special interests, etc. However, she also points out so much more information is now available on the Internet that it is easy to track down far more personal details. So it can be easy to track down a journalist's previous jobs, Facebook pages, where he or she went to college, etc. 

Much of this information would have originally been put on the Internet by the journalist. I am frequently amazed at the very personal information people voluntarily put on publicly accessible website pages. Is this information fair game or too personal to use? Surely there can be no ethical arguments against using it as it is in the public domain, usually put there by the journalist. After all, every journalist I know wouldn't hesitate for a moment to use the same information in a story he or she was researching.

Does this mean there no such thing as a private life anymore? Would PRs be happy at similar information being published in a journalist's newspaper or magazine? I think not. So where should the line be drawn? This is one of these questions that has a different answer for different people. Like all ethical questions there is no easy answer. Or is there?

The $250m Twitter question

The Internet is awash with rumours that Google is wanting to Twitter and ready to pay about $250m. While the credit crunch may be hitting some parts of the world, it looks as if Twitter make fly off to yet new heights if the tie up with Google comes off. Twittering could become as mainstream as blogging.

For those of us yet to join the rush to Twitter and not quite sure what to use it for I was glad to find this guide on the benefits for the PR industry:

WTF is Twitter and why should I care?

From www.prblogger.com

Is Twitter really worth $250m? How do we really find the value of Internet-based busineses? Tomorrow we will be flying elsewhere and $250m is a lot of cash for just a quick touchdown. Friends Reunited seems old hat today but ITV bought it for £120m (then $208m) back in December 2005.

So what is the next big thing? Well, if I knew the answer to that then I could be $250m richer.

Wikis: simple things for people like me

I hate it when computers become difficult. Html codes and such things can make all our lives so complicated. Surely there is a reason why we all like the simple things in life. Wikis work like this, using the simplest of computer language, so even people, like me, who have many better things than learn computer languages can use them and make changes. What should we use them for? Well here is a simple explanation:

From You Tube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-dnL00TdmLY

This You Tube video has already been watched more than 700,000 times: there, I knew people like simple things. However, in Rob Brown's new book: Public Relations and the Social Web (2009: p.39, Kogan Page, London) he recalls how the founder of Jimmy Wales, the founder of Wikipedia, said, in an interview in 2006, that PR people should not edit Wikipedia or wikis in general. Jimmy Wales thinks it is unethical for PRs to change wikis: so is this an open source that is not open, or does he have a point? Of course, academics love to hate Wikipedia. Do they just hate Wikipedia because it challenges their authority or are they right to be sceptical about everything they read? Isn't that there job? Of course, PRs need to check out Wikipedia articles for their clients but, if Jimmy Wales is right and they shouldn't change these articles, what are PR practioners supposed to do when they uncover articles which they know are wrong or damaging - just leave them. Is that really ethical? I'm confused already: I thought wikis were supposed to be simple.

Is anyone there?

Picture from http://www.sxc.hu/photo/1076973

Blogging seems to me a solitary sport, unless of course there is someone really out there commenting on what I am writing. This led to me thinking that I might just be completely wasting my time blogging. So do blogs have any use as a public relations tool? In search of an answer I stumbled upon Michael L. Kent's article in the Public Relations Review: Critical analysis of blogging in public relations. Even this learned academic appears to have no answer to my question, concluding that "...many professionals are suggesting that blogs have tremendous potential as tools for online communication and reaching diverse publics. They do. Interestingly, however, scholars have been saying the same thing about the Internet for almost 10 year and most organizations have not yet figured out how to use their Web sites well except to sell things. Ultimately I believe that the jury is still out on blogging."

So what really is the answer? Am I just talking to myself? Should I just stick to speaking to myself in front of the mirror? Perhaps blogging is just the green ink brigade finding a new arena in cyberspace? So is there a real point to blogging? I think that there is only a point if someone is out there. Is anyone listening?

Introduction

Welcome to Kevin O'Hare's PR blog which will look at the influence that technology is having on public relations theory and practice.

In my first post I should just like to introduce myself.

Before studying at Stirling University I worked for the Scottish Crime and Drug Enforcement Agency as its Head of Strategic Communications. The SCDEA leads the fight against organised crime in Scotland.

I had spent the previous 15 years working as a journalist in Glasgow at Scotland's leading quality broadsheet newspaper, The Herald, where I was the Chief Sub-Editor.

Last year I co-wrote a biography of my former boss at the SCDEA. The Enforcer: A Life Fighting Crime was released last October by Black & White Publishing.

When I'm not studying or working as a journalist I am most likely to be found playing my piano. Last year I played in Glasgow for a BBC piano festival, pianothon, a celebration of amateur piano playing. I hope you enjoy it: