Ahh, what confusing times we work in. The Daily Show makes fake news more popular than real news, and marketers pass off professionally produced advertising as amateur content. Where visibility was once the name of the game, companies are choosing to obscure, not highlight, their involvement. At the same time, we celebrate candor, openness and authenticity.
Welcome to the world where PR and marketing professionals must navigate between real and fake, news and entertainment, deception and transparency.
When it comes to leveraging user generated content and social media, should we reveal ourselves or hide in plain site? The new rules of transparency afford us both options. Sometimes good publicity entails anonymity - lest we reveal the man behind the curtain. And sometimes it is the man behind the curtain, the inside story, that we want to highlight.
It's no wonder that Newsweek Senior Editor Steven Levy recently asked YouTube founders Chad Hurley and Steve Chen at the D Conference this past spring how they felt about YouTube viewers being duped by advertising masquerading as amateur content and what they can do about it?
For marketing professionals and, increasingly, PR practitioners, it is not enough to be informative, we have to be entertaining. We can't be straightforward, we have to be edgy. We can tease and redirect, but we can never deceive.
Clearly, hoaxes and fake news are not a new phenomenon. Well placed disinformation has started wars and ended careers. But as Robert Love asks in his excellent article, "Before John Stewart: The truth about fake news. Believe it," in the Columbia Journalism review, "Can we continue to trust ourselves? Are we prepared for the global, 24-7 fake news cage match that will dominate journalism in the twenty-first century?...The boundaries have vanished, the gloves are off."
Consider the following:
- We accept television ads for pain relievers knowing full well the testimonials made by actors are fake because we know the ground rules; we're used to the form.
- We tune in the Daily Show and while the subjects are real, the treatment is not. They know it; we know it. We laugh; it's funny; it's entertainment.
- Or the other hand, it's decidedly unfunny when Wal-Mart Stores set up a pro Wal-Mart blog and didn't fully reveal that the bloggers were tied to Wal-Mart.
- Or possibly it's illegal as in the case of John Mackey, chairman and chief executive of Whole Foods who used a fake name to post pro Whole Food comments on an Internet message board.
So when is "fake" acceptable? Talking to marketers and social media experts, I believe it comes down to intent and context. Make believe is appropriate when it's intended to entertain; it is completely inappropriate when it's deception designed to mislead or advance an unstated agenda.
A wink and a nod to the audience may be the difference between a wildly successful viral campaign and outright hostility. It's the difference between the saga of lonelygirl15 who was in fact just an actress and the fake blog of a cosmetically-challenged woman Claire who was just a creation of Vichy, a division of French cosmetics giant L'Oreal. The former was entertainment; the latter was an attempt at a fast one.
Consumers need to be in on the joke, not made to feel that the joke is on them. At some point, there must be a sign or signal that what they are seeing, reading or listening to is entertainment or make believe.
And that's exactly what The Lenovo Group did. Most people don't they are the world's third-largest personal computer maker. What did they do? They went viral with a spoof Web site. As Steve Hamm reported in BusinessWeek that the site attracted 3 million visitors in first few weeks. The campaign pretended to let viewers in on some super advanced technologies being tested by the company. The site's anonymous producer had supposedly received some videotapes revealing the secret research. The joke is apparent once viewers click through to the tapes.
So how did the YouTube founders answer Steven Levy's question? Chen responded that it came down to a question of trust and individual decision. He felt that it was up to informed users to decide.
I think that is true, but it is only half the equation. We as marketing and PR professionals must act responsibly and respectfully. The mixed signals in the marketplace don't give us the right to deceive even as we take advantage of new technology, new forms of content and changing consumer expectations to entertain, inform and ultimately promote our companies and our clients.
Let me get back to you.
Technorati Tags: Daily Show; Jon Stewart; Steve Levy; Lenovo; Robert Love; Chad Hurley; Steve Chen; D Conference; Marketing; PR; Fake News;
Add to NewPR Save to del.icio.us
link to original post