See-Through Corporations

Chris Anderson is starting a writing project in Wired on the new trend in business away from the traditional mode of secrecy and limited disclosure, and toward what he calls “Radical Transparency.”

The default communications mode of companies has traditionally been top-down, with only executives and official spokespeople permitted to discuss company business in public. The standard rule, explicit or not, was “That which we choose not to announce is not to be spoken about.” Aside from some special exemptions, such as conferences where those employees trusted enough to go chatted guardedly with outsiders, employees were cautioned that what happened at work should stay at work. Loose lips sink ships, etc.

As Edelman has reported, “a person like me” is now the most trusted source of information, surpassing even doctors and academic experts. And thanks to the web it is now easier than ever to pick the brains of “people like me.”

I think this is one of those “it depends” situations, though. I agree that people generally trust the opinion of a rank-and-file employee more than a corporate spokesperson, but the credibility of a physician is still extremely high, especially a specialist speaking to an issue in which he or she has expertise.

In my work in media relations, we guard the credibility of both Mayo Clinic and our physicians by not putting them in a position to comment on something that isn’t in their area of special training. We also produce syndicated news content, which is reviewed not only by the subject expert being featured but also by a medical editor, so consumers aren’t just getting one person’s opinion, but a team consensus.

And, of course, we have federal patient privacy laws (which essentially codified what was our practice) that also limit what can be disclosed. Our policy always has been to protect patient privacy unless they choose to make their stories public. The real change now is the advent of blogging by patients and family members, with people telling the story of their health care experience directly to the world.

Word-of-mouth always has been an important way for people to learn about Mayo Clinic, either from patients or from physicians whose patients have come here. Patient blogs are, to borrow a phrase I found 659 times in a quick Google search:

Google search

“Word of Mouth on Steroids.”

And sites like CarePages and CaringBridge are specifically designed to make it easier for patients and their families to more efficiently stay in touch with concerned family and friends.

This is a trend that will only accelerate. Conversations that were formerly one-to-one will be taking place in a much more public arena, at least for some patients (or for businesses, customers) who choose to tell their stories. That makes it even more crucial for businesses and health care providers to at least be listening to what’s being said in blogs, and joining the conversation when appropriate.

TechnoratiTechnorati: , , , ,

CBS, YouTube and Affiliates

Lost Remote has a post in which it examines concerns from CBS affiliates that the network, by posting programming to YouTube, is putting them at an unfair disadvantage…because they are prohibited from posting clips from, say, Latenight with David Letterman, until 24 hours after they run.

But if the clips are on YouTube, anyone can stream them from their site. Even me.

[Youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ryTnUijXW0Q]

Maybe the affiliates don’t want the YouTube bug on their sites, but if I can put this clip on my blog in 5 minutes or less, certainly the affiliates could. And, as CBS has found, placing clips on YouTube has raised the broadcast ratings…which will be a benefit to the local affiliates.

So, CBS affiliates, why not take advantage of the situation, and post YouTube clips on your station web site, instead of complaining that you’re being bypassed again?

TechnoratiTechnorati: , , , ,

A Note to Jeff Jarvis of Buzz Machine

I tried to leave a comment on this excellent post from Jeff Jarvis on Buzz Machine. For some reason I got an error message the first time I posted, and then got a duplicate comment warning when I tried again.

Jeff had taken issue with Brian Williams’ approach to interactivity on the NBC Nightly News broadcast. Here’ my comment for Jeff:

I agree completely with your comments. I’m glad NBC is offering its content as a podcast (at least placing its wares in a place that’s more convenient for me, so I can watch on the bus in the morning), but when I saw this mailbag segment Friday I, too, struggled with dyspepsia.

Reading kudos from viewers, utopian “We are the World” suggestions and one lame complaint about choice of tie color and pattern isn’t media glasnost.

At least Bill O’Reilly, whatever you think of him, usually reads a sampling of hate mail and plaudits, to show that “if everyone is mad at you, you must be doing something right.” That’s not great either, but at least it’s a step above this.

Have you checked out Brian Williams’ blog? I haven’t yet (will probably head over there now), but I wonder if that’s interactive to the point that it lets people leave comments.

If it is, maybe you could post a link to your post on his blog.

The big networks aren’t going to turn the keys over to what still is an audience of 8-9 million for their over-the-air program that still commands tens of thousands of dollars per second for ad revenue.

I know you’re saying it formerly was an audience and it used to be content, but if there is going to be real interactivity it’s going to come in a related blog, not in the broadcast.

So maybe I overstated a bit when I started by saying “I agree completely.” I do agree this kind of “pick a few notes from the mailbag” is a waste, but I don’t think we’ll see what you’re advocating in the broadcast program.

The good news is people like us have ways of talking back (as you did). Five years ago we wouldn’t have had a chance.

Are you going to post this on YouTube? I’m wondering why you use embedded QuickTime instead of YouTube. It would seem the BuzzMachine could get even more buzz if people could include your video in their blogs.

This comment has gotten a lot longer than I had intended…so I’m going to post on my blog, too. 😉

Thanks for all you do.

Maybe this will work in Jeff’s blog as a trackback.

Meanwhile, Jeff, if you’re seeing this, I did just go over to Brian Williams’ blog, and he does have a place for comments. Maybe you could leave a comment there with a link to your post.

I don’t know whether it will get past comment moderation. They post this disclaimer:

All comments must be approved before appearing in the thread; time and space constraints prevent all comments from appearing. We will only approve comments that are directly related to this post, use appropriate language and are not attacking the comments of others.

It’s worth a shot, don’t you think? I can see that they would have heartburn about putting criticism of their program on their high-priced broadcast platform, but if they are interested at all in any kind of real conversation, it would seem a comment from you, and a link to what you said on your blog, would be a minimum level of engagement.

TechnoratiTechnorati: , , , , ,

Thoughts from the Bulldog Online Measurement Teleconference

In the Bulldog teleconference today I came away with some helpful insights about how to use online monitoring. My earlier post has more of the points I made.

Evan made a really good point that you need to measure things that are in keeping with your goal, and what the desired user response is. For example, if your goal is to influence opinion through an initiative as opposed to selling something, focusing on click-throughs is short-sighted; it gives you numbers that are relatively meaningless.

Angie Jeffrey walked us through a measurement matrix she has developed. You can reach her for a copy of this by email at (I think she will be willing to share this if you ask. Please let her know Lee sent you her way…which would be one way of getting some anecdotal measurement of how many people are taking action based on this post.)

Donna added that setting measurable objectives means we need to define the target audience, what we want them to do, and in what time frame. For example, we want 75 percent of articles in electronics trade publications that mention our company to include at least half of our key brand messages. She also showed her dashboard of key measures, which she uses to share information with TI management.

I would welcome any comments or questions from people who want to have a discussion about this.

TechnoratiTechnorati: , , , ,