Great points, Mark! I find some of the same pushback regarding social media use. There are many who say if you are using social media for business then you are doing it wrong. Communication tools are just that, tools. The use of these tools can be as varied as the people using them.

~Alys

You really make some good points, Mark. And it’s hard to argue with those great examples of blogs that work. I have to disagree on the elitist aspect, though. Just because some of us believe that a blog is different from other forms of corporate communication doesn’t mean we’re taking an elitist stance.

A company blog is an awesome thing. I advocate them and think they’re far more relevant and connective than a traditional website. I love writing them and appreciate their value in building a brand. I would just never tell a client to include their personal byline on a post they didn’t write because it’s inherently dishonest. I would say to either use the byline of the person who actually wrote it, or leave it without credit so the reader hears the general brand voice and doesn’t associate it with an individual. You’re right, a blog doesn’t necessarily have to be “personal” (such as a corporate blog), but it should be honest.

I know being so staunch against ghost blogging for a CEO isn’t a very popular position to take… because “everybody’s doing it” and there’s a lot of money to be made on it. I just feel that as an industry if we give a pass on it and allow blogs to lose their authenticity, we’re contributing to the loss of something we won’t be able to get back. Consumer trust. And we’ll be back to where we were, with all forms of corporate communication once again being disregarded and not given much weight because the consumer thinks it’s calculated marketing speak.

It’s not about being a blog elitist. It’s about seeing the value of something that’s a powerful connector between a brand and consumers. And not wanting to see it lose what made it so valuable to begin with.

Thanks, Mark! Keep up these great, thought-provoking posts!

As a fan of unpopular thoughts, I’ll go ahead and log my own here.

If you read it and keep reading, why do you care about the source of the content? I don’t care who’s putting up the scholz over at the Huff Post. I recently began hosting guest bloggers on my own site. IM-not-so-H opinion, if the content is compelling enough to keep me coming back, it could be penned by a three-armed monkey for all I care.

As a writer, I write because *I have to.* It’s what I do. If a blog were recognized by any other name (column, trash can, hamster), I would place my content in said vehicle. Personally, I’m not worried about those concerned with the “authenticity” of the source. If you have the balls to put content out there that’s more than just spinning and scraping, I applaud you for finding that voice and the “publish” button. And I tell my clients, the ones for whom I (gasp) ghost blog the same thing. Not everyone is a writer. The finest (and crappiest) report to shareholders out there – they’re all ghostwritten. When we stop being elitist and start recognizing that there are some pretty outstanding things in this world that come from collaborative efforts – damn. We might just be moved to “write” something extraordinary ourselves.

Nothing wrong with having high standards. If you put your name on something, you should be writing it or admit otherwise.

And there’s nothing wrong with elitism. It often inspires others to do and be better.

@Michelle – Re: “I would just never tell a client to include their personal byline on a post they didn’t write because it’s inherently dishonest.” Agree 100%.

@Mark – I’ve always wondered how Seth manages it. Sounds like plausible detective work to me. Nevertheless, perhaps this whole debate is slightly off the mark. Perhaps we should be asking why most companies don’t have blogs in the first place, rather than questioning how others handle an existing blog.

A company without a blog (Facebook Page or Twitter account) in the first place often strikes me as needing to be a bit more transparent.

I too find it amusing how many Internet police there are out there, trying to impose their idea of blogging, social media, or websites as the standard everyone must follow.

-RG

Mark – another great thread going here. And I liked what I heard from BP in the comment above [not often you hear that these days...]

The evolution of the web has skewed definitions, and so it should because it shows that we are continually investigating new options. Years ago, someone invented websites. A few years later, someone invented [and, crucially, christened] the first blog. The two were different. But then people realised there were many shades of grey in between the two – such as websites that allow interaction, or blogs that were not as personal and maybe didn’t allow comments.

What makes one a blog and not the other? The blurring of definitions fuels this debate, and also makes a mockery of it in some ways. It doesn’t matter what you call it – just as long as you don’t try to pretend it is something it is not.
Oh, and ghost-written pieces are often excellent for another reason – you don’t let someone write for you unless they’re good at it!

But then you know this Mark – and well done for getting the debate going again!

John

I find it interesting that on this topic of corporate communication there are so many varied opinions. Whether the forum is blogging or radio spots or tv commercials or the “About Us” page on the website or sponsorship of a local little league team or presence on a committee or a presentation to other professionals or a logo on your bag of airline peanuts – it’s BRANDING. Do we dissect who’s behind the brand in any of these instances? Of course not. Why should a blog be treated any differently? Blogs are simply one additional arrow in the quiver of corporate communication. And those companies sharpening their arrows in the social media arena are going to hit their target demographics.

Great post Mark! Timely too.

Your post gave me the exact same reaction as I got when I read Scott’s comments on our industry:

“Forget above the line and below the line. Forget lines. Forget silos. Forget competing disciplines… to truly move forward, many of those models will have to be torn down and rebuilt.” Scott Donaton – Advertising Age

It’s so interesting how some people look at this industry as coming of age, when others say it’s barely made it’s debut.

Regardless of where we are on the life cycle, this is (relatively) new (and constantly evolving) territory and there is no one size fits all. If it were, we’d be seeing bronze, silver gold packages of social all over the place.

I half wonder if ‘participating’ is where the rules of engagement should be discussed and considered. Not how you use the tools.

Also, I love your social network widget. Is that homemade?

Not only are you a brilliant blogger, but you’ve got some smart, thought-provoking people reading and commenting too. It’s a testament to your continuing quality and ability to sift/stir the pot just the right way, Mark! Thank you!

Thanks for this. I recently replied to a thread about blog comments and saw a variety of comments that I felt were elitist and more on the arrogant side. Bottom line, it is up to the Blogger and his/her goal to determine how business and blogging is done.