The UK's CIPR social media guidelines launched today are apparently not guidelines at all. They are - in fact - part of an advisory notice to members.
Anyway. Who cares? I doubt many people actually carrying out blogger relations etc or working in or around social sites will take great interest in them.
Firstly the advisory notice is pretty much aimed at the 'average' CIPR member and therefore is designed to strike the fear of god into explain how social media works.
Secondly I really wonder how many PR bloggers etc out there are actually CIPR members and thus bound by the Notice?
Someone who isn't a member is ...theworldsleading... who has by far the best take on the guide...code...whatever...
There definately remains a need for some serious set of agreed guidelines for PR practitioners working in the blogosphere as proposed late last year.
I agree that there should be a set of guidelines available on corporate blogging but how effective they would be remains to be seen. Personally I think that reputation sets the standard for conduct and it boils down to what kind of an image you want to project.
Posted by: sam wilcox | February 23, 2007 at 10:29 AM
"When posting a comment on another blog it may also be advisable to state that you work in the public relations profession" is hardly a guideline - more a tentative suggestion. As for this advice from our own President, Lionel Zetter announcing the guidelines in his blog post:
"So blog away like billy-o, and work those wickis. But keep it real, and keep it honest!"
Er.....keep it real?
*sighs and remembers David Cameron's Life FM interview*
Posted by: gill alexander | February 27, 2007 at 12:34 PM
Hopefully the guidelines will become firmer in a few months, as the consultation for them ended on 31st January.
Posted by: Ren | February 27, 2007 at 06:45 PM
Hi Ren. The guidelines/Advisory Notice/whatever were launched last week so are now fixed. Although, Francis at the CIPR does indicate that they could be revised as time goes on... so in fact will become less fixed!
Posted by: Simon | February 28, 2007 at 08:52 AM
Yeah, I think what I meant what as the consultation only ended in Jan 07 then the just-published guidelines would probably undergo some more tinkering in the future, especially as they're first-ever guidelines.
Posted by: Ren | February 28, 2007 at 09:04 PM