Scratching in an update here from the TECH cocktail Conference at Loyola (downtown campus, figured this out at the last minute right before leaving the house to drive to north Chicago).
Panel is discussing use of social media to craft a brand for a business. There is a question from the audience about whether blogging works when an employee for a company has a different perspective from the company itself.
Danielle Wiley says that she doesn’t necessarily speak as an individual for the companies she consults in PR. For example, she writes about primarily organic foods while her clients may sell processed foods.
Does this contradiction hurt Danielle and her prospects for working with these clients in the future?
More generally, can a person writing on the persistent, open web, express a personal viewpoint that doesn’t fit the mold of their work brand?
This isn’t a black-and-white issue, but I believe that the answer is a (qualified) yes.
In today’s marketing climate, with bottomless inboxes of deceitful spam and hoaxy health product offers, consumers are yearning for honest voices, even if the words from that voice don’t conform with their personal views.
Blogging and other social media is personal by nature. I would argue that blogging is almost pointless if the creator isn’t set to open him/herself as an individual with unique beliefs.
Even the blog of the largest corporation should read like an individual’s voice, with convictions and values that may, in fact, represent the entire company, but first and foremost portray honestly the writer’s persona.
Consumers can see through the smoke. They want honesty and openness. Both sides are humans and should communicate like people — voice to voice. Social media can provide that. It can help form an open communication pathway between the company and the consumer.
That’s what marketing fundamentally is, isn’t it?
