Berlind's Media Transparency Channel
If you're looking for my podcasts, please read What to do if you're looking for my series of podcasts on IT Matters. Otherwise, read on.

This blog is now a part of my experiment in media transparency. The premise is that if the media can broadcast polished edited content through one channel like ZDNet, then why can't it also broadcast a parallel channel that's full of the raw materials (thus, this "channel"). For a much more detailed explanation, be sure to check out the following:In case you're interested, maintaining a simplistic transparency channel like this one has so far involved a significant amount of heavy lifting. The core technology may exist, but it's my opinion that a decent UI for publishing a transparency channel does not. So, one outgrowth of this experiment might be a complete specification for such a system -- Something I call JOTS.
        

Raw Data: How PR people feel about communicating with journalists practicing transparency

Transparency Note: Identification of Source Omitted

Below is an excerpt from an e-mail received from one of my sources who notified me that the PR community's grapevine was experiencing indigestion over my decision to publish some of my correspondences with various public relations personnel.  I think it accurately captures an emotion that journalists who practice transparency must be equipped to deal  with.  Next, I will work with the PR community to come up with a set of best practices that is respectful of PR professionals -- one that doesn't cause them to shut down on journalists who practice transparency while still allowing those journalists to, in the name of credibility, offer as much transparency as possible.

*transparency note: since my source asked that their identity remain confidential,  I have removed any text that could serve as an identifier.
==== Begin Excerpt ====

I think [what you're doing] will scare people.  I don't know that it means people *won't* pitch you, but it might make them think twice about being aggressive or edgy with you.  Especially since, for example, the second email wasn't even a pitch, it was a confirmation -- so you're posting things beyond just the initial pitch.  It won't scare me away, because we have some type of relationship and I trust you.  But if I didn't know you, it would probably scare me. 

I have no idea if [the e-mail about what you're doing] is widely circulating.  My co-worker got it from someone at another agency who had forwarded it to people at probably three different agencies.  And I know that it go forwarded to [everyone at our agency].  So, it may get around on a grassroots level very quickly?

And, yes, I think you could be more clear about why you're doing it, because, for PR people, this may just appear to be a form of public embarrassment.  I know you, so I know you're not the type of reporter to try to do that -- but some reporters do this kind of thing for that reason, so it may be misread as that.  Being more clear about why and about the parameters, NDAs and such, would probably help.  I confess I'm not even clear about why you're doing it.   But if you help me understand, I'm happy to help you figure out a way to make that more clear (from my perspective as a PR-er).

==End of excerpt====




© Copyright 2005 David Berlind. Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.
Last update: 3/24/2005; 12:02:15 AM.