The Debbie Weil – alliconnect – astroturfing flare-up grew a little too personal for my taste, so I am mostly happy to see the thing fade away.
And it never should have flared up at all…. Debbie Weil just didn’t know any better.
See, what surprised me from the start was Weil’s defense of her invitation to astroturf:
“There’s nothing underhanded about the email I sent, as I posted the same request publicly on my blog. And I didn’t send it to a list of “prominent PR bloggers.” Just a list of folks I know. It’s not that big a deal. Bloggers – corporate and otherwise – use the backchannel of email all the time to communicate with one another.”
What kind of explanation is that? How she sent the invitation is, of course, irrelevant.
But in reading the posts of those who criticized her effort and those of her (few) defenders, I suddenly realized what was up. Debbie Weil doesn’t know astroturfing is wrong — she doesn’t work in PR or corporate communication, and doesn’t realize astroturfing is a huge breach of ethics. And, pretty much down the line, her defenders are outside the communication profession and her critics are in it.
Now, I know the general public ranks PR professionals fairly low, somewhere around lawyers and CEOs, but 99.9% of the PR professionals I’ve met take their ethics codes (PRSA‘s, for example, or IABC‘s) very seriously. Astroturfing is something we just don’t do (and some are working actively against it), and we damned sure aren’t shy about calling people on it when we catch them at it. But that works only if the other person should know better.
Debbie Weil just doesn’t. Well, that’s alright then! Isn’t it?
Update: she should have gone to buyblogcomments.com.
{ 6 comments }
It's not clear cut that it was astro-turfing. As with so many things the devil in the detail. Asking people to comment is fine, asking people not to reveal she knows them wasn't. If the criticism had been focused on this it would have been fine (that's what I did), but some of it was too generic.
Have to disagree, Bruce:
1) the appeal was sent to people she knows professionally, not to people in the drug's target group,
2) she hinted strongly that commenters shouldn't mention her role in their recruitment,
3) the effort was aimed at generating positive traffic, since negative comments weren't then allowed on "alliconnect" (this weekend, though, they have either "let in" or "seeded" one faintly negative comment).
To me, that adds up to an invitation to astroturf.
But, as I said, I don't think Weil knows the difference. In my 20 years in the business, I've been approached about astroturfing twice. Both times, it was an external marketing consultant who truly didn't know better. And both times, the idea died aborning, as it did here.
Sorry to disappoint Allan. I do know what astroturfing is and no, that's not what this was. The throwaway phrase in my email "no need to say you know me" was just that… a throwaway phrase and a bit of a joke. Works fine in an email to friends (well, I thought David Murray was a friend) but not when posted publicly on a blog. This has been an unfortunate lesson in how very nasty the PR blogosphere can be. Let's move on…
One more thing. Negative comments have been allowed on GSK's blog from the get-go. Here's the Comments Policy: http://www.alliconnect.com/alliconnect/2007/06/comments_policy.html
Allan, I agree that Debbie's "throwaway" comment created the perception of Astroturfing, provided we are defining it as a PR campaign cloaked in the guise of grassroots. Whether Debbie deserves to be pilloried (whereas Edelman surely did) is another matter. As we all know, success is more about execution than strategy, once the battle is joined. The strategy of asking colleagues to go see and comment if motivated is probably grassroots enough for my taste; the desire to keep secret the professional connections therein violates my own ethics toward transparency. So, a Tsk to the esteemed Ms. Weil, but just one.
(my comments are my own personal opinion…darn lawyers…)
Lessons, Debbie, by their nature, can never be "unfortunate" … you probably meant "treatment effect," in which case, I agree… time to move on.
However, please don't insult DRC readers with "we've always allowed negative comments…" We all know this is not true. And it is telling that the Alliconnect blog let a few mildly negative comments only when your tactic blew up… perhaps even negative comments are better than no comments.
Sean, if Edelman deserved the stocks, why not Weil? Or is it a case of "difference of degree?"