2 ms·

While the naive me wants to act shocked, the other part of me gets the feeling this is business as usual and mostly just a big deal because it leaked out. I wou

by zaidf 15y ago

While the naive me wants to act shocked, the other part of me gets the feeling this is business as usual and mostly just a big deal because it leaked out. I wouldn't be surprised if Google had its own anti-FB plants doing their thing. May be someone from the PR world can tell us how common/uncommon this type of "operation" is.

corin_ 15y ago
I've never been involved in this sort of PR, but basically the big deal isn't that it happens, it's that they got caught. While it's behind the scenes it's hard to say how much it happens, but it doesn't really matter. I mean, the PR firm were trying to spoon feed a writer with information he could use to write a story, if he decides that information is worth writing, and readers decide it's worth reading, then fair enough. But it's an important story because Facebook have failed to keep secret the fact that they are trying to attack Google, and that will have implications on politics between those two companies. Even if Google already knew that Facebook were doing this kind of stuff (more than likely), Facebook being outed changes how Google can act towards them with a different public reaction.
- bad_user 15y ago
  the big deal isn't that it happens, it's that they got caught Big words, no references ... not wanting to do an ad-hominem here, although I could ;) ... at least provide some anecdotal evidence that software companies, in Silicon Valley, as public and as visible as Google are doing it. Thanks,
  - ewoks 15y ago
    Lot of money at stake, don't be a naive idiot.
  - deleted 15y ago
    [deleted]
deleted 15y ago
[deleted]
hornokplease 15y ago
Uncommon for the agency to not disclose who their client is with this kind of request (ghost writing an op-ed under the byline of an expert). BM offered a mea culpa today that notes as much: Now that Facebook has come forward, we can confirm that we undertook an assignment for that client. The client requested that its name be withheld on the grounds that it was merely asking to bring publicly available information to light and such information could then be independently and easily replicated by any media. Any information brought to media attention raised fair questions, was in the public domain, and was in any event for the media to verify through independent sources. Whatever the rationale, this was not at all standard operating procedure and is against our policies, and the assignment on those terms should have been declined. When talking to the media, we need to adhere to strict standards of transparency about clients, and this incident underscores the absolute importance of that principle. Source: http://www.mediabistro.com/prnewser/b-m-says-facebook-assignment-should-have-been-declined_b20772 http://www.mediabistro.com/prnewser/b-m-says-facebook-assign...

by zaidf 15y ago

corin_ 15y ago

I've never been involved in this sort of PR, but basically the big deal isn't that it happens, it's that they got caught. While it's behind the scenes it's hard to say how much it happens, but it doesn't really matter. I mean, the PR firm were trying to spoon feed a writer with information he could use to write a story, if he decides that information is worth writing, and readers decide it's worth reading, then fair enough. But it's an important story because Facebook have failed to keep secret the fact that they are trying to attack Google, and that will have implications on politics between those two companies. Even if Google already knew that Facebook were doing this kind of stuff (more than likely), Facebook being outed changes how Google can act towards them with a different public reaction.

bad_user 15y ago
the big deal isn't that it happens, it's that they got caught Big words, no references ... not wanting to do an ad-hominem here, although I could ;) ... at least provide some anecdotal evidence that software companies, in Silicon Valley, as public and as visible as Google are doing it. Thanks,
- ewoks 15y ago
  Lot of money at stake, don't be a naive idiot.
- deleted 15y ago
  [deleted]

deleted 15y ago

[deleted]

hornokplease 15y ago

Uncommon for the agency to not disclose who their client is with this kind of request (ghost writing an op-ed under the byline of an expert). BM offered a mea culpa today that notes as much: Now that Facebook has come forward, we can confirm that we undertook an assignment for that client. The client requested that its name be withheld on the grounds that it was merely asking to bring publicly available information to light and such information could then be independently and easily replicated by any media. Any information brought to media attention raised fair questions, was in the public domain, and was in any event for the media to verify through independent sources. Whatever the rationale, this was not at all standard operating procedure and is against our policies, and the assignment on those terms should have been declined. When talking to the media, we need to adhere to strict standards of transparency about clients, and this incident underscores the absolute importance of that principle. Source: http://www.mediabistro.com/prnewser/b-m-says-facebook-assignment-should-have-been-declined_b20772 http://www.mediabistro.com/prnewser/b-m-says-facebook-assign...