We ask two communications professionals to debate an issue via email. In this month’s digital discussion, the question is: “Is social media erasing the need for PR as the intermediary step between brands and journalists?”

Supporting the motion is Jeremy Waite, head of social strategy at TBG Digital. Kicking things off and arguing that in fact, social media makes the need for professional communicators greater than ever, is Neil Daugherty, director, Blue Rubicon.

Dear Jeremy,

This is easier to answer in 300 words than 140 characters.... The numbers in support of this motion are superficially compelling: Facebook ticks toward a billion users, and in the UK Twitter claims 10 million active users. At the same time paid newspaper readership is in terminal decline.

anyone can interact, connect and converse with anyone – the ultimate meritocracy where brands, celebrities and punters meet and tweet as equals.
The promise of social networks is that

But for brands, social media is in reality just another channel to reach audiences. Its immediacy and perceived intimacy reaffirms the importance of professional communications advice. Because a social media interaction is not a conversation down the pub: it is an indelible digital fingerprint of a brand.

The Twittersphere is littered with brands and celebrities who have got these interactions spectacularly wrong. If you consider Rio Ferdinand a brand (@ rioferdy5) as he so obviously does, then there are clear prices to be paid from tweeting first, thinking second. Social media is now a primary source of newsgathering – the candid and spontaneous are followed as they make for great copy: great in good times, but less so when brands or reputations come under fire.

Brands should think very carefully about how they use social media. Millions of social conversations will happen about them each day. They need to tune into the right ones, and then they need to consider whether they have permission to engage in those conversations, i.e. to correct a factual misconception or address a customer complaint.

Neil
The most socially savvy brands can create content that will excite their followers. That requires audience insight, judgment and creativity: great news for professional communicators.

Dear Neil,

Thanks for kicking things off - you make some great points. I was worried this would be a very dull debate until I noticed you suggesting that “a social media interaction is not a conversation down the pub.”

I’m not sure I could disagree more. Social media acts exactly like a conversation in the pub. It’s a conversation platform. Twitter especially. 175 million tweets a day bounce back and forth between people chatting to each other. Almost 500m people log into Facebook everyday to chat to their friends, view photos, share cool stuff and arrange where to go out. Isn’t that what you do when you’re “down the pub”?

Anyway, my take on social media and PR does not involve celebrity injunctions lurking around the corner, but the fact that PR as an industry is out-dated, as well as REALLY expensive. Having a professional advise you about how to act online is a wise move, but this discussion is about PR as an industry.

Social media has removed the need for many traditional PR agencies to even exist. For the first time in history we are living in a pull (not push) economy. Brands can no longer win by pushing out polished messages; they need to focus on what people are really saying about them.

Measuring column inches, eyeballs and press cuttings doesn’t matter anymore. TV, radio and press are nowhere near as powerful as they used to be, yet PR agencies are still promoting the same channels and charging the same expensive fees.

Social media makes PR accessible to everyone. Of course there are pitfalls and potential disasters, but you have to behave responsibly whatever platform you are on. An agency is considered to have done its job well if it landed a big gig - like getting Tom Cruise on Oprah, but they can’t stop him jumping up and down on the sofa. Twitter is no different. It’s a doubleedged sword….

Best,
Jeremy

Jeremy:

After two exchanges we’re having a pub debate? Perhaps we should start a campaign to rename this @lagerheads?

Let’s be honest though: for every pearl of insight, there is a mass of pub philosophy. In the hubbub of fragmenting media consumption, people gravitate back to trusted media brands and news sources for insight. If 10m people in the UK tweet, five times as many don’t. Good PR practitioners start with audience insight and weigh the best channels to reach millions of individuals.

You say “brands can no longer win by pushing out polished messages”. What’s new? Winning brands were always the ones that listened, understood and engaged with their customers better than their rivals. A landmark legal judgment in Australia may mean Facebook is now considered just another ad platform when it comes to establishing marketing claims.

Social media interactions are different to a chat down the pub because they aren’t throwaway. Designer Kenneth Cole found this to his cost when jokingly comparing the Arab Spring to his spring sales, and then attempted to delete the evidence. For every @KennethCole there are countless companies (Asda, McDonald’s, Starbucks) interacting well with customers online – but this should compleme

nt, not replace, work in other media channels.

Back to the original question – where do journalists sit in this brave new world? While the third screen on newsroom desks alongside the newswire terminal and the PC is now Tweetdeck, they need as much help as anyone to sift the deluge of information. That’s where professional communicators come in.

Best,
Neil

Dear Neil,

I’m glad you feel that the PR industry is shifting away from fat monthly retainers. It’s about time! Social certainly opens up lots of interesting possibilities for brands to engage directly with their audiences, my concern is just that ‘professionals’ are often an unnecessary buffer between brands and their consumers.

I’m a big fan of community management and PR being handled in-house, only because professionals / agencies are seldom as passionate about the brand (and its’ story, core values, beliefs etc) as actual employees. Social media makes handling this process easier than at any other time in history.

85% of people who work in social media have been in the industry less than two years, which often means that professionals don’t necessarily have more experience / wisdom than in-house employees anyway. There are always exceptions of course.

Pub-wisdom is one such exception. Sometimes you receive good advice, sometimes it’s terrible. But like all advice – it’s a question of who do you trust the most? For many brands – the people they trust the most are their closest friends and fans, rather than industry professionals. Microsoft and Facebook have lived by this philosophy – rolling out products that weren’t perfect and letting their community tell them what to change / improve.

I personally think that most companies should take control of their own PR. The best PR agencies I’ve met teach brands how to manage their own PR: how to deal with crisis-comms, identifying the most influential audiences, how to respond with relevant content etc.

It’s not as simple a discussion as I originally thought though. I think it all comes down to two things. Does your agency add value – yes or no? Does it provide ROI – yes or no? If the answer to either of those questions is No, then you probably shouldn’t be using them.

Thanks,
Jeremy