What is Colin Farrington on about...?

In the latest issue of CIPR member magazine, Profile [some bits password-protected], CIPR director general, Colin Farrington, reviews PR Voice, the new blog by CIPR president, Tony Bradley.

Bizarrely he asks "can blogging really become a powerful medium?". I'm not sure what to quote first... but there's plenty of sound evidence to suggest or even confirm that blogging already is a powerful medium.

His review is like reading one of those 'On this day...' columns in newspapers where historic pages are re-visited to unveil what great truths hindsight bestows on us. If nothing else the review displays a mind that worringly appears to be working well behind the cutting edge of PR.

Try this excerpt for size:

"It's really the sense of most blogs being first jottings and half thought through that bothers me. I value the language of Shakespeare, Samual Beckett and Hemingway too much to see its daily massacre. 'Blogs' seem in many cases to spring straight from a semi-engaged brain onto the page ... saddies and surfers read most of them."

Apart from some poor syntax that I have omitted and the fact that Beckett's language was predominently French rather than English, this smacks of sad, reactionary thinking. It certainly surprises me that it comes from the DG of UK's PR trade body.

I am not sad and certainly not a surfer... but so what? Even if saddies and surfers were the only socio-economic group to read blogs they're still a potential market or target audience for someone.

Colin concludes by asserting:

"At any rate I predict in the United Kingdom: either a civilised reaction against the alleged [sic] power of the 'blog', which is what I would like to see, or the production of incredibly high-quality, thoughtful and innovative blogs that will prove me wrong. These would be of the quality being pioneered by CIPR president Tony Bradley ... Down with bad blogging!"

If Colin has his way and the UK undergoes a 'civilised reaction' against blogging, where would that leave us in relation to the rest of the world? The US is already way ahead of the UK in blog terms, and France's bloggers are pretty powerful too (remember November's civil unrest caused by the 'alleged' power of blogs?). This would be bad news for business and, I would argue, democracy.

And all due respect to Tony Bradley's great blog.... but 'pioneering'? Any thoughts, Stuart Bruce, Drew B, Antony Mayfield, Philip Young, Stephen Davies, Richard Bailey... ? I could go on.

Of course, I could be falling into a trap set by Colin and give him the pleasure of unleashing my "half thought through' opinions with a "semi-engaged brain". Alternatively I could be challenging the staid and reactionary views of the UK PR trade's establishment body.

Am I off the CIPR Christmas card list yet?

Comments

[Stephen Waddington]

I read this article, and like you, wondered how someone in an industry leadership position could be so out of touch.

Yes, there are a lot of ill conceived blogs, but then there is also a lot of ill conceived web sites, articles in the daily papers and magazines.

The fact that Colin Farrington is so dismissive and has ignored the fact that this new medium is becoming a corner stone of PR is scary.

[Antony Mayfield]

Perhaps we should give a little slack to people in the twilight of their career trying to come to terms with all this - and I'm not being entirely facetious when I say that. We need to understand that this world is very intimidating indeed to some, and expect the odd knee-jerk denial and sneering tones.

But it sounds very much as if he is speaking from a position of ignorance. He has a responsibility not to do that, and Profile should not be publishing such nonsense. Shameful.

If enough people took their cue from views like this, Colin could be the spokesperson for the twilight of the industry. We should expect more from the nominal leaders of our profession.

I'm not too worried - there are enough vibrant, innovative voices out there in PR, experimenting and innovating and making sense of the new world of communications to make views like this a near irrelevancy.

[Dennis Howlett]

Hey Anthony - be careful of ageism here or you might bring on a grumpy old git rant.

[Antony Mayfield]

You don't have to be old to be in the twilight of your career, just drifting out of relevancy. And there's certainly no age bracket around the "vibrant, innovative voices" I mention either. Seriously.

[David Phillips]

Simon at least you had the courage to say it.

Your comment reminds me of an institution where the President started to blog without first thinking through the strategy behind the move or the new media consequences.

http://leverwealth.blogspot.com/2006/06/getting-social-media-strategies-right_30.html

You have 30 seconds to name institutions that fit the bill.

But being nearly sixty one, I guess it might take me a moment longer.

[Mark Pinsent]

Simon - I agree with the majority of your points, and Farrington is certainly getting the stick he deserves, but for you to assert that the civil unrest in France last November was caused by blogs is misguided and, sadly, falls into the trap set by Colin and his 'blogs aren't all that' cronies.

Civil unrest, consumer action, community reactions...these are *caused* by government policy, piss-poor products, discrimination, anti-ethical behaviour...blogs then communicate, convince, magnify, motivate and call to action. Which is why they're powerful.

Otherwise, top job.

[Simon]

Thanks for all these comments.

Mark, you are right technically. Unrest of any sort is *caused* by policy etc... however, the point I maybe didn't articulate fully was that blogs (esp. ones hosted by the radio station Sky FM) helped orchestrate or fuel the riots. See http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,,1640780,00.html for a brief mention

[Sam Smith]

I think the thing that struck me most about this was not the comments themselves (I've heard plenty of similar, equally as poorly spelled/written comments from numerous sources) but more who it was making them. For a representative of the PR trade's establishment body to dismiss something that has already demonstrated significant potential in PR as 'sad' and 'half though through' is a little worrying and shows a lack of understanding or even a willingness to understand new concepts. And, as you say 'even if saddies and surfers were the only socio-economic group to read blogs they're still a potential market or target audience for someone' - long tail theory anyone?

I'd be interested to see what Colin considered to be a 'high-quality, thoughtful and innovative blog'