Dec 11th, 2006 | Corporate Blogging, Cox Communications, Definitions, GE, McDonald's, Microsoft, Novell, Wells Fargo | 8 Comments
Here’s a list of explanations of the term blog, taken from seven different corporate sites:
Blogs are Web pages which are updated frequently, written from the point of view of an individual, written in an informal tone, and usually expose (sic) an RSS feed for syndication.
from: Microsoft Community Blogs
While we provide a Cox point of view, we also shoot for a balanced discussion that’s light on bull and heavy on substance. We air third-party commentary and even views from those who just might disagree with us.
from: DigitalStraightTalk (Cox)
We live in a constantly changing world where the issues are complex and solutions anything but simple. With such complex issues, we may not always agree on the root causes or best solutions, but we can have a conversation.
from: Open for Discussion (McDonald’s)
We hope that, through this blog, understanding the trials and successes that communities have experienced in natural disasters will propel you to develop your plans for disaster preparedness.
from: Guided by History (Wells Fargo)
From Edison’s Desk [..] offers a unique forum for technology enthusiasts around the globe to discuss the future of technology with top researchers from one of the world’s largest and most diverse industrial research labs.
from: From Edison’s Desk (GE)
Novell Open PR gives Novell watchers information about what’s happening in the company that might not make the cut for a press release, but is still of interest to the market and Novell’s customers.
from: Novell Open PR (Novell)
A blog (short for web log) is a web site containing dated entries. Think of it like an online journal. Blogs are usually written in the first person by an individual or group of folks, and they update regularly, sometimes every day. There are many different kinds of blogs […].
from: Earthling (Earthlink)
I’ve collected this little round-up of quotes to show that there is hardly a consistant view of what a blog is or does in the corporate world (not that there was any reason to assume otherwise).
The definition to fall back on is the strictly formal-technical one: blogging is a form of web-based publishing and blogs are websites (or parts of websites) which are managed via a specialized content-mangement software. They usually consist of entries displayed on the main page in reverse chronological order and usually have an archive of older entries. Beyond that - i.e. when thinking about the possible functions of blogs - things get a lot more complicated.
The reason for the high degree of variation is that the blogs listed above serve a variety of purposes, and each applies its own “blogging philosophy” to the explanation given. At the same time, I think it’s safe to assume that the blogging practices of those companies are also shaped by what they believe (”good” / “real” / “correct” etc) blogging to be. Let’s look at a few definitions.
Microsoft lists four aspects, one formal (post frequency), one technical (”exposing” RSS feeds) and two stylistic ones (point of view and informal tone). The technical ones aren’t entirely unproblematic. Is it not a blog if I post infrequently? Is every source which provides - sorry, exposes - an RSS feed a blog? But these things are commonly cited because stylistic aspects are even harder to nail down. “Informality” is very much in the eye of the beholder (see here for one end of the scale, here for the other). College professors, teenagers, CEOs and housewives all have their own understanding of what informal language looks (or sounds) like. And what about personal point of view? It seems to apply to most blogs, but there are counter-examples. For example, the Thomson Holiday Blog currently has a word count of several thousand strings in my database, with a mere four instances of the personal pronoun “I”. It is also posted anonymously (as are many product blogs) and comments are quite scarce.
Cox completely omits formal aspects and highlights content instead, committing itself to “substance” and a “balanced discussion” which is contrasted with “bull”. The discursive quality of blogs - different parties expressing controversial opinions - is marked here as the most important characteristic of the blog. The almost complete lack of comments in Digital Straight Talk speaks a somewhat different language. Cox seems to be experimenting with a sort of talk-radio approach to blogging, especially when smacking about its favorite competitor.
McDonald’s similarly highlights discussion (or - subtly toning it down - conversation). The Open for Discussion blog is a part of the company’s corporate social responsibility (CSR) strategy. It is authored by the senior director for CSR, Bob Langert, and his staff. Open for Discussion is interesting because it presents the example of a much-criticized company walking on a sort of public relations blogging tightrope. Langert responds to comments quite frequently - a practice which is absolutely not the norm, especially in a blog that is so clearly image-related. Many of the comments are highly critical of McDonald’s’ business practices and accuse the company of using the CSR initiative purely for cosmetic effect (see this exchange). The challenge to Langert and Co. is to be as diplomatic as possible, while never being too drastic in the acknowledgment of possible mistakes. The discursive practice and McDonald’s’ openness in engaging in it with the public takes precedence over the issues, because the issues remain controversial (”we may not agree […] but we can have a discussion”). That is not to say that the company isn’t serious about the CSR program, but showing McDonald’s’ ability to accept criticism without admitting defeat seems to be the key function of the Open for Discussion.
Wells Fargo and GE don’t care too much about the ontological status of blogs but get right down to business. Guided by History (Wells Fargo) relates the stories of natural disasters to remind us to get insurance… why not from Wells Fargo? Similarly, GE’s focus is on research on the topical level, but on the functional level From Edison’s Desk is about image and possibly recruiting. Both are innovative strategies in my opinion, and they contradict the idea that some kind of constant visible interaction with a community (e.g. via comments) is always an equally vital measure of blog success. GE doesn’t need to appeal to just everybody: what counts is that junior researchers and tech journalists will see the blog as an indicator of the company’s innovativeness.
Novell makes an interesting qualitative distinction when announcing to blog things that might not make the cut for a press release. Press releases are given the “official” and “universally relevant” stamps, whereas blog entries are characterized as containing more general-purpose, less essential information. This hierarchy of relevance is hardly surprising, considering that press releases are an entrenched form of text while blogs are still young. Question is, of course, why the two are regarded as separate concepts at all, especially when assuming the former to be a kind of text and the latter to be a mode of publishing? Why not blog press releases? What about the technology of a blogging software makes it necessary to write differently or present different information than you would with a PM?
Alright, I’ve decided to stick the rest of this round-up into another post because, as usual, I’m far from done. Yeah, so much for writing shorter entries 
Oct 3rd, 2006 | Charlene Li, Corporate Blogging, Cox Communications, Verizon | No Comments
Charlene Li reports that the U.S. telco company yesterday launched a blog on technology and telecommunications policy. It should be interesting to see how they fare - who knows, perhaps they’ll get into a scuffle with the folks over at Cox. One thing going for Verizon is that I can tell who actually writes their blog, which is rather unclear with DST. As I’ve ranted before, authorship matters.
Edit: Apparently they’re also planning to launch a customer services blog by the end of this year. Sounds ambitious.
Sep 26th, 2006 | Corporate Blogging, Cox Communications, Dell, GE, McDonald's, PR | No Comments
Today’s dish consists of four special ingredients:
a) a Happy Meal, only complete with the plastic replica of a controversial vehicle
b) an exploding laptop
c) a talking lightbulb
d) cable TV with an attitude
I’m taking a closer look at four sources that I have classified as image blogs (see one,two). My assumption is that the main purpose of these blogs is to influence the public perception of a company in ways which are only tangentially related to the goal of increasing sales.
Let’s look at the examples one by one.
Digital Straight Talk (Cox Communications)
While we provide a Cox point of view, we also shoot for a balanced discussion that’s light on bull and heavy on substance. We air third-party commentary and even views from those who just might disagree with us.
(from http://www.digitalstraighttalk.com/about/)
Cox’ “light on bull, heavy on substance” mantra mirrors the attitude the company seeks to convey: “direct”, “no-nonsense”, “opinionated”. And yes, that does sound like talk radio. It’s an interesting approach for an image blog; what could be called the offensive strategy (Wal-Mart is similar), as contrasted with the more defensive style of Dell and McDonald’s. A look at several posts (one, two, three) rather contradicts the claim that Cox “airs (sic) third-party commentary”, unless you count citing negative studies on cable and their refutation by Cox as commentary. As is often the case with product blogs, there is hardly a discussion taking place (in fact, I could not find any comments on the Cox blog so far). Digital Straight Talk is very much devised as a public relations megaphone, focused on loudly articulating a positive view of Cox and of cable in general and a negative view of the telecom companies and other competitors. It’s very much a one-way street in terms of who communicates.
From Edison’s Desk (GE)
From Edison’s Desk […] offers a unique forum for technology enthusiasts around the globe to discuss the future of technology with top researchers from one of the world’s largest and most diverse industrial research labs.
GE’s main corporate blog presents the company’s research efforts in a number of areas (energy, transportation, computing) to a scientifically inclined audience. The researchers who collaboratively write the blog frequently use images and charts along with references to published academic papers in their posts. Comments are quite frequent and sometimes seem to come from members of other departments at GE, which supports the impression that the blog is not purely aimed at consumers or the general public, but also used as a means of communicating internally. Since the interest-group targeted is quite specific (people with a solid background in science or engineering) the blog is also a useful tool for recruiting.
Direct2Dell (Dell)
While Dell’s new blog also serves multiple purposes, it appears to be most popular as a place for disgruntled customers to vent and consequently for Dell’s CRM team to plead for forgiveness and promise betterment. While recent posts on Linux, diagnostics and the importance of e-mail have not garnered a lot of feedback, a 10-questions entry on Dell’s new XPS700 gamer PC line and the chain of mishaps associated with it has to date produced the incredible number of 272 comments, some of which are scathing. However, due to the inclusion of open criticism the conversation is largely perceived as “real” and “honest” and a substantial number of customers gives Dell good grades for their approach to “customer service via blog” (not to be confused with the grades they receive for their handling of the XPS700 issue). The 10-questions post is also an interesting example for “crisis management via blog”.
Open for Discussion (McDonald’s)
McDonald’s is unlikely to complain about a lack of feedback either, though as with Dell it’s not all love and appreciation in their corner of the blogosphere. VP Bob Langert provides an interesting description of his strategy:
The important thing is that we listen to–and respect–one another’s viewpoints. That’s the mission of this blog. To be frank, I’ve been hoping for more comments, more dialogue. This Hummer issue has definitely stirred things up. And I think that’s good.
The reasoning here is that the authenticity of a real conversation between McDonald’s and its critics positively outweighs any damaging effects the criticism itself might have. Someone who is completely uncritical of McDonald’s is not likely to even read the blog, and if he does it is highly unlikely that reading critical comments will have any negative effect. Conversely, those who are critical of McDonald’s can still be influenced - not necessarily by a change of behavior, but possibly by changing how the company communicates with skeptics.
Each of these four examples shows a slightly different approach to blogging:
1. Use your blog to tell you customers what’s going on, directly, without a middle man.
2. Use your blog as a talking showroom of your research, and to communicate internally.
3. Use your blog to bring controversial issues to your own doorstep. Participating in the discussion is in itself a means of influencing the discussion.
Note that all three approaches depend on involving the readership. The fourth option would be use your blog as a megaphone (as Cox is doing it), but I’m doubtful whether that is really a adequate application for a blog. The problem is that the credibility attached to blogs is related to their ability to function as discussions - if you’re not talking to anyone in particular and there are no voices other than your own, this discursive dynamism is taken away. I figure out who you are by watching how you respond to others. If you’re not responding to anyone but instead holding a monologue, that tells me preciously little about who you are. In the worst case, I’ll come to the conclusion that you’re either unwilling to listen or incapable of responding (see one of the comments on Langert’s post where he’s criticized for not reacting to questions).
Blogs posses an unparalleled degree of flexibility that other channels of communication available to companies lack. Issue a press release and you’re talking to a middleman, not to your customers. Produce an ad and you have no back channel and no chance to act in a social context, which would allow you to build trust. Place a job ad and engage in an extremely formal and highly asymmetrical exchange with potential candidates, an exchange that is largely about meeting requirements and allows for very little conversation, at least initially. However, this versatility goes hand in hand with a certain lack of predictability related to the participatory nature of blogs. The result of a discussion cannot be a “clear message”, but arguably a discussion can be much more persuasive and powerful than a lone voice, especially when that voice isn’t talking to anyone in particular.
