Bloody great, best-in-breed, article about online PR and marketing ethics by my buddy David Gelles of the Financial Times — he is surely a golden child and new media journalist rock star… be sure to put this article in front of your boss, whether you are a PR flack or are a corporate stooge — I think this article is actually going to be printed into the pink pages of the FT on Thursday, February 12 — go pick it up and hand it to the members of the C-suite, Blogs that spin a web of deception:

A web of deception By David Gelles

An overenthusiastic em­ployee from the computer supplies maker Belkin posted an offer online last month – $0.65 for anyone willing to write a positive review of Belkin products on Amazon.com. Several people took up the offer, producing gushing appraisals of Belkin products they had never used.

After a blogger exposed the scam, news organisations jumped on the story. The offer was removed and Belkin’s president weighed in with an apology.

The incident was a public relations disaster for Belkin. It was also a prime example of “Astroturfing”, the unsavoury marketing practice of generating fake grassroots enthusiasm for a product.

Given the anonymity afforded by the internet, it is hardly surprising that deceptive marketing is on the rise. Consumers are spending more time online and companies are seeking new ways to reach them.

But now, in an effort to regulate how employees behave on the web, companies and industry groups are developing their own online codes of ethics. They want to ensure that when staff do engage with social media, they act ethically.

Last year, Coca-Cola established its own set of social media guidelines and distributed them in a memo to all employees. The policy emphasises the need for transparency and encourages employees to use common sense when discussing the brand online. “We’ve always had very diverse channels to reach consumers,” says Adam Brown (pictured), digital communications director. “Wherever they are, that’s where we go. That’s now evolved into the need for a social media policy.”

So when Mr Brown went online to promote Coca-Cola’s Super Bowl advertisements, he followed the guidelines. On Facebook, Mr Brown announced that he was a Coke employee and pointed other users to the Coke ads on YouTube. On Pittsburgh Steelers fan forums, Mr Brown, who is from Pittsburgh, named his employer and then directed fans to the Coke blog, which had an interview with Steelers’ defensive star Troy Polamalu.

Mr Brown said more deliberate engagement with online conversations was a necessity for a global company such as Coca-Cola. “We’re mentioned several thousand times a day on blogs, and there are several hundred tweets about us on Twitter,” he says. “There is a lot of conversation taking place about our brand without us. Where appropriate, we wanted to start getting involved.”

Companies began interacting with social media years ago. But only recently have those involved with the industry perceived a need to develop ethical standards. Among the first to do so was The Word of Mouth Marketing Association, an organisation for the viral and buzz marketing industry. Womma published an ethics code in 2005, emphasising honesty of relationship, opinion and identity.

Since then, many companies have used the Womma code as a blueprint for their own guidelines. “Companies are learning every day that there is a right way and a wrong way to engage with social media,” says Paul Rand, vice-president of Womma’s board and head of its ethics project. “Some companies are learning by touching the burning pot; some companies are learning from the mistakes of ­others.”

One company that “touched the burning pot” is Shelfari, a social networking site for book lovers, owned by Amazon. As it battled for market share in late 2007, it came under fire for its poor design and clunky user interface. Soon, comments appeared on more than 50 blogs attesting to Shelfari’s greatness. “I have been on Shelfari for a couple of months now and absolutely love it,” read one. “Shelfari is such a great site. I joined a couple of months ago and I have been hooked on it ever since,” read another.

But all the comments were posted by the same user, “schaufferwaffer”, who was soon exposed as a Shelfari employee. Shelfari’s chief executive admitted to the Astroturfing (he blamed it on an intern who knew no better), and promised it would never happen again.

Such behaviour is declared out of line in the “disclosure best practices toolkit”, an ethics code drawn up by the Blog Council, an organisation for heads of social media at big companies. The document advises employees and agencies to announce whom they work for when communicating with blogs or bloggers. It also encourages employees to provide a means for contacting them directly, if someone they interact with via social media wants to follow up with a two-way conversation. The toolkit also warns against using pseudonyms.

IBM was one of the first companies to develop its own social media policy. In 2005, it published its “social computing guidelines”, which insist that employees write under their own names, using the first person, and make it clear they are speaking for themselves and not on behalf of IBM. It also prohibits employees from referencing clients, partners or suppliers without their approval.

UPS is developing its own online ethics policy after recognising how damaging Astro­turfing and other online misbehaviour can be for a company’s reputation. “If one of our airplanes goes down, we have a very clear plan for getting information to the media,” says Norman Black, director of global media services. “We realised we did not have a good plan for responding to a crisis on the ­internet.”

In some countries, deceptive marketing practices are not only frowned upon but also illegal. In the UK, the law identifies “falsely representing oneself as a consumer” as a punishable offence. And in 2006, the US Federal Trade Commission issued regulations stating that word-of-mouth marketers must disclose their relationships. But in spite of these new rules there has been little enforcement of the measures.

Even without prosecution, Belkin seems to have learnt its lesson. Melody Chalaban, speaking for the company, says Belkin will soon be holding seminars to teach employees how to interact ethically with social media, and is also considering joining Womma. “We want to stress that this is an isolated incident,” says Ms Chalaban. “We don’t endorse or condone unethical practices like this.”

Side Bar: The last post: underhand tactics can end in a PR disaster

* Flogging. Fake blogs can help companies get a personal voice behind a marketing campaign – but they risk a PR disaster if they are uncovered. When Sony tried to boost sales of its PSP portable gaming unit, it started a blog supposedly by two boys who wanted PSPs for Christmas. When it was revealed as a fake, Sony apologised and took it down.

* Astroturfing. A technique that gets its name from the practice of generating fake grassroots enthusiasm. One Florida company, PayPerPost, serves as a matchmaker between companies willing to pay for good press and bloggers willing to plug products that they have never used. After receiving criticism, PayPerPost now requires bloggers to disclose that their posts are sponsored.

* Comment spamming. Flooding the comment fields of blogs with enthusiastic notes about a company, even with full disclosure, is not welcomed by web users. When a Motorola employee commented on dozens of posts on a technology blog – each comment a plug for the new Motorola Krave – bloggers responded with snide criticisms of his spamming, which duly ceased.

Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2009

In response to Do PR Execs and Lawyers Have the Same Bad Rep?, Amanda Chapel responded, “Your logic is flawed at the outset (with all due respect) . . .”

The key word is ‘neutrality.’ We sell belief in things we do NOT necessarily believe in or are even believable. By definition, that’s a lie. Good people doing an honest days work promoting lies… does not make it true. You not knowing the difference between right and wrong doesn’t make stealing a car okay.”

I replied, “When you are a neutral solution, you don’t lie, you just pass through client message. That is like saying that it is the amp that is tone deaf and not the singer! It is like saying that the defense attorney is guilty and not the alleged perp, and it like saying that one should blame the soldier and not the war.”

Shel Holz is smart and insightful in his response to the bad rap that PR gets these days: “The lying profession? Please. … And who, in this era of like-it-or-not transparency, believes they can get away with a lie anyway?” Via Strumpette. My response? I feel the same way about the reputation of the defense attorney as I do about PR. Defense attorneys have appalling reps. “How the hell can you represent him? He’s a murderer! He’s a rapist! He’s a scum!”

Well, the problem is is that since the PR profession is, in a lot of ways, a neutral solution, PR tends to begin to pick up the tastes, the coloring, and the aroma of the additive, the client.

Most attorneys wish that they could “cherry pick” their clients and so do most advertisers and PR professionals. I hear, all the time, that taking on so-and-so a client would be bad for brand and I am appalled by that.

My friends over a TickleKitty, a sex shop, need New Media Marketing and WOM PR as well, but lots of folks are either too uptight, too puritanical, or too judgmental (or too attached and afraid so as to have lost some requisites: shamelessness and fearlessness, a competitive advantage in an industry that is afraid of its collective shadow).

What I love about Edelman and their respective practice heads and VPs+ is that they’re pretty shameless (though they don’t quite have fearless under control and their hubris and arrogance is off the charts).

So, since PR is itself so neutral — some call it shape-shifting or chameleon-like (there is no there there) then we take a lot of the brunt for the actions of the client. We suffer for the sins of the father…

People ask me what I think about “full disclosure” and “blogger ethics.” My answer always is, there is no obligation for any blogger to follow the ethical standards of journalists or public officials. Bloggers are bloggers because of the true freedom of speech. Freedom of speech doesn’t demand truth. But, if bloggers want to keep the trust they’ve been given by their readers, then they had better be open, honest, authentic, and transparent.

That said, the trust relationship bloggers have built and enjoy with their readers is quite a powerful feedback. That relationship is the market force that keeps bloggers honest, not ethical standards or requirements. Ultimately, I demand rigorous reader discernment — caveat lector, let the reader beware — and do not suffer morons gladly.

Here are some previous articles that I have written about the topic:

Blogger Ethics Coverage:

The New York Times Code of Ethics is Mandatory for Journalists Not Bloggers

Caveat Emptor et Lector Repost

Bloggers Can Ignore Basic Journalism Ethics

Bloggers do not Aspire to be Journalists

Pay Per Post Coverage:

Vanity Advertising on PayPerPost is Addicting

Edelman Ethics Coverage:

In Defense of Edelman over Bribery Charges

Not a Bribe with Disclosure and Transparency

BL Ochman Gets the Vista Edelman AMD Bribery Scandal

I Think I May Have Jinxed Edelman PR

Andy Sernovitz of WOMMA Blames the Victims in Edelman Controversy

What I Would Have Done if I Were Edelman Me2Revolution

Paul Mooney on and the New York Times’ Silence about the Edelman Bribe

Microsoft Did Not Bribe Bloggers Reports Microsoft

Journalism Gods Agree with Me on The Bribe

I spent nearly three-years living the life if an “NMSer.” It is where I got trained up in the art of new media strategy and new media marketing. I had an amazing experience working there and I am also happy to share the latest post-Meredith purchase in the form of a very nice article, Tracking Who’s Saying What About Whom: New Media Strategies’ ‘Online Analysts’ Scour the Web for Mentions of Opinion-Sensitive Clients, by Kim Hart, on the Washington Post. Simply put, co-founders Pete Snyder and Aaron Earls are truly visionaries, deserving of their notable success.

Tracking Who’s Saying What About WhomNew Media Strategies’ ‘Online Analysts’ Scour the Web for Mentions of Opinion-Sensitive Clients

By Kim Hart

Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, January 29, 2007; Page D01

Moira Curran starts her day at the office by skimming several dozen blogs, occasionally firing off instant messages to her co-workers with links to juicy bits of celebrity gossip.

Then she listens to podcasters chatting about the latest episodes of “Grey’s Anatomy” or “Lost.” In the afternoon, she keeps an eye on soap operas on the television set that hangs above her desk.

Ashley Duncan, left, Carrie O’Malley, center, and Jenni Collins are among the New Media Strategies employees who comb the Web for clients that want to protect their brands and public images. (By Ricky Carioti — The Washington Post)

About 70 colleagues, scattered across two floors of an Arlington high-rise, spend eight hours a day doing much of the same. Some of them are also playing video games, watching movies and cruising around MySpace.

That’s exactly what the clients of New Media Strategies, an online marketing company, pay the employees to do. Companies ranging from movie studios and television networks to automakers and burger chains hire these professional Web surfers to scour the Internet for any mention of their brands. Over the past few years, the “online analysts” have helped the companies track their reputations, found ways to get their products noticed and joined online conversations to help steer them the way clients want them to go.

More recently, as the explosion of blogs, social networks and video-sharing sites has driven big companies to recognize the role of Internet image in protecting their bottom lines, traditional media companies and private investors are seeking to buy Web-savvy start-ups that have a toehold in cyberspace.

That’s what happened to New Media Strategies this month, when it was acquired — with two Los Angeles-based online marketing firms — by Meredith Corp., a Des Moines-based media company known for its sturdy lineup of traditional magazines such as Better Homes and Gardens and Ladies’ Home Journal.

“I see the Internet as the world’s largest focus group,” said Pete Snyder, a former media consultant and political pollster who started the company out of his Capitol Hill apartment eight years ago. He had received a few casual offers to buy the company, but interest spiked in the past year. “So many companies have been so deeply entrenched in old media. . . . Now they’re looking to plow into the Web 2.0 world.”

Evidence of that world abounds in the Arlington office, brightly painted in red, orange and yellow. A podcast studio occupies a corner office, and conference rooms are named “.com,” “.net,” “.gov” and “.org.”

Posters from the movies the company has helped promote line the walls — so many that passersby sometimes ask if the office doubles as a theater. Framed albums from Black Sabbath and several seasons of “American Idol” hang next to a flat-screen television reserved for “product viewing.”

Many of the online analysts wear headphones all day and chat with bloggers via instant messages. Their job is to be the clients’ eyes and ears online, said Clay Dunn, 28, a brand manager who monitors what is said about video games and movies.

He watches for rumors and alerts his Hollywood clients if online coverage goes awry. Once, for example, backstage photos from a movie set surfaced and spoiled a sneak preview already in the works.

Curran, another brand manager who trolls the Web on behalf of television clients, corrects errors published in blogs. If rumors spread that someone’s been fired from the cast of HBO’s “Entourage,” for example, she’s there to set the record straight. If an angry viewer bashes a network for a violent scene in a prime-time show, she’s there to post a rebuttal. She watches soap operas so she’ll be able to chat knowledgably with the rest of the online audience.

“Every day, I’m an absolute sponge,” said Curran, 25.

Curran said she is careful to acknowledge her connection to clients when it’s required. All online marketers have to walk a fine line when they work the blogosphere. Federal Trade Commission rules require them to identify their roles when they’re making a point on behalf of a client, but if they’re gossiping about the latest episode of “Desperate Housewives” they can legally be as anonymous as anyone else.

Ashley Duncan, left, Carrie O’Malley, center, and Jenni Collins are among the New Media Strategies employees who comb the Web for clients that want to protect their brands and public images. (By Ricky Carioti — The Washington Post)

The New Media Strategies employees are young, self-identified tech geeks whose goal is to know the Internet inside and out — an increasingly daunting task as hundreds of new blogs and Web sites crop up every day. They try to stay a few strides ahead of online developments — or at least only a step or two behind.

“The Internet used to be our oyster,” Curran said of the days just a few years ago when there were only chat rooms and message boards to monitor. “It still is, but we have to reassess the things we pay the most attention to.”

New Media Strategies’ entertainment practice was the first to take off; Hollywood has long been willing to spend money to influence the online world. Over the past few years, Coca-Cola, Burger King, AT&T, Dodge and Ford joined the client roster. Most recently, public affairs has become the fastest-growing area for the company.

“Before, we could barely get a politician to spend money on a Web site, let alone a massive Web campaign,” Snyder said from his Arlington office. “The world across the river is waking up to this.”

So are buyers and investors. Media companies are starting to show strong interest in adding interactive firms to their portfolios, said Seth R. Alpert, managing director of AdMedia Partners, a New York investment bank that facilitates deals between advertising and marketing companies. AdMedia represented New Media Strategies in its recent acquisition.

“Serving advertisers is now seen as being more broad than putting ink on paper or building Web sites,” Alpert said.

British marketing giant WPP Group, which includes established advertising firms Ogilvy & Mather and Young & Rubicam, has acquired several interactive-media firms. Nielsen Media Research combined three online-research companies to create Nielsen BuzzMetrics, which analyzes online markets.

In the Washington area, private investors recently put money into another start-up — Clarabridge, a Reston company whose software crawls Web sites, recording what people say about specific products or brands and tabulating the occurrence of positive or negative words to help clients assess their cyberspace images. For example, it tracks recommendations and criticisms about certain airlines on travel sites.

The company calls the process “online intelligence.” It is currently working for pharmaceutical companies to get a sense of how consumers feel about the drugs the clients make.

“This can shape how they spend that million dollars to launch a product,” said Sid Banerjee, co-founder and chief executive of Clarabridge. “There are enough mainstream consumers making decisions on the Internet that they represent a meaningful sample of the market.”

Last week, the company took in $7.2 million in venture capital funding from Intersouth Partners, based in Durham, N.C., and Reston, bringing its total financing to $10 million since it started in 2005.

Cymfony, a Boston interactive-media firm and a competitor of New Media Strategies and Clarabridge, has received $24 million in venture capital cash in the past seven years.

Cymfony got its start doing research for intelligence agencies but decided to use its text-mining software to monitor the consumer-generated Web. Its business has doubled as advertisers take to the Internet, said chief executive Andrew Bernstein.

“There’s too much media online and no one knows where to turn,” he said. “So they turn to us.”

“Pete Snyder, Founder and CEO, New Media Strategies, Inc.: Pete is the Founder and CEO of New Media Strategies, the industry pioneer and market leader in online intelligence, brand promotion and brand protection, headquartered in Arlington, Virginia. Drawing on his background as a pollster and media consultant, Pete founded New Media Strategies in 1999, establishing a new industry in market research, brand marketing and communications. New Media Strategies uses technology to tap into the power of the Internet and the blogosphere, helping leading corporations and causes, including some of the biggest Hollywood brands, to promote and protect their brands and bottom lines, online. As CEO, Pete has guided New Media Strategies’ success and rapid organic growth. Over the past six years, New Media Strategies has built a blue-chip client base that features some of the best known brands and corporations in the world, including among others: ABC, AOL Time Warner, Atari, Boston Beer Company, Burger King Corporation, Dodge, Disney, EA, Elektra Records, HBO, Levi’s, McDonald’s, Monster, Northwest Airlines, Paramount Pictures, RCA Records, Red Bull, Reebok, Revlon, Sci-Fi Channel, Sony, USA Network, and Wyeth. Pete was recently honored as a finalist for the Ernst & Young Entrepreneur of the Year awards, and New Media Strategies was recently recognized on the “Inc. 500″ listing of the Fastest Growing Companies in America. Proving that a company can focus on fast growth, profitability, and fun, New Media Strategies has been recognized by Washingtonian Magazine as one of “50 Great Places to Work” in Washington, and the Washington Business Journal recently honored New Media Strategies as one of Washington’s Best Places to Work. A former political media consultant and a pollster to New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani, Pete regularly appears as a commentator on the Fox News Channel and has served as a marketing and political expert on CNBC, The News with Brian Williams, CBS Evening News with Dan Rather, and Fox News Channel’s Your World with Neil Cavuto, Hannity and Colmes and Fox and Friends. New Media Strategies has appeared in national media publications including the Wall Street Journal, Washington Post and the Hollywood Reporter.”

In politics and advertising, the term astroturfing describes formal public relations (PR) campaigns which seek to create the impression of being a spontaneous, grassroots behavior. Hence the reference to the “AstroTurf” (artificial grass) is a metaphor to indicate “fake grassroots” support.

The goal of such campaign is to disguise the agenda of a client as an independent public reaction to some political entity —a politician, political group, product, service, event.

Astroturfers attempt to orchestrate the actions of apparently diverse and geographically distributed individuals, by both overt (“outreach,” “awareness,” etc.) and covert (disinformation) means.

Astroturfing may be undertaken by anything from an individual pushing their own personal agenda through to highly organised professional groups with financial backing from large corporations.

Word origin
The term, said to have been used first in this context by former U.S. Senator Lloyd Bentsen (Democrat-Texas), is wordplay based on “grassroots democracy” efforts, which are truly spontaneous undertakings largely sustained by private persons (not politicians, governments, corporations, or public relations firms). “AstroTurf” refers to the bright green artificial grass used in some sports stadiums, so “astroturfing” refers to artificial grassroots efforts.

Techniques
A form of propaganda, astroturfing attempts to selectively affect the emotions of the public, whether trying to win a campaign, be the top music record seller, the top book seller, or gain political support.

The most frequently identified cases of astroturfing are found in recent political history. The concept itself is older and was widely used by the Soviet Communists.

Astroturfing techniques usually consist of a few people discreetly posing as mass numbers of activists advocating a specific cause. Supporters or employees will manipulate the degree of interest through letters to the editor, e-mails, blog posts, crossposts, trackbacks, etc. They are instructed on what to say, how to say it, where to send it, and how to make it appear that their indignation, appreciation, joy, or hate is entirely spontaneous and independent. This makes their campaign seem “real” rather than the product of an orchestrated campaign. Local newspapers are often victims of astroturfing when they publish letters identical to those received and printed by other newspapers.

It has become easier to structure an astroturfing campaign in the electronic era because the cost and effort to send an e-mail (especially a pre-written, sign-your-name-at-the-bottom e-mail) is so low. Companies may use a boiler room full of telephones and computers where hired activists locate people and groups that create enthusiasm for the specified cause. Also, the use of psychographics allows hired supporters to persuade their targeted audience. This correlates with the merge-purge technique that combines information about an individual from multiple databases. Companies can then turn hypothetical supporters into activists for the cause. This leads to misuse of the Internet, for one person is able to play the role of a whole group of like-minded people (see also Internet sockpuppet).

News consolidation services, such as Google News, as well as PR Watch and Sourcewatch, have made it easier to spot such campaigns through the search of specific key phrases that bring up results showing identical letters, articles, blogs, websites, etc.

Examples

Early examples
At the turn of the 20th century, it was common to have newspapers in major American cities sponsored by local political parties. Some were open about this practice, but many of these relationships were hidden. Other examples include political “clubs” which front for voter fraud and intimidation, letter-writing campaigns organized by local ward bosses, and some union-organized political activities.

In one case, documented in the book All the President’s Men, the Committee to Re-Elect the President orchestrated several campaigns of “public support” for decisions made by President Nixon in the period preceding the 1972 election, including telegrams to the White House and an apparently independent advertisement placed in The New York Times.

Another case is that of Bolivian dictator General Luis Garcia Meza Tejada, who at the end of his promised one-year rule staged a televised rally and declared “Bueno, me quedo,” or in English: “All right, I’ll stay.”

Manipulation of public opinion was also used in the Soviet Union. Political decisions were often preceded by massive campaigns of orchestrated ‘letters from workers’ (?????? ??????????, (pisma trudyashchikhsya)) which were quoted and published in newspapers and radio. In Stalin’s era, massive “public demonstrations” were organized against “the enemies of the people”; those attending were often forced or intimidated into doing so.

Examples from the 1990s
In 1991 a memo from PR firm van Kloberg & Associates to Zairian ambassador Tatanene Tanata referring to the “Zaire Program 1991″ was leaked. The memo outlines steps the firm was taking to improve the image of Mobutu Sese Seko’s regime, including placing dozens of letters to the editor, op-ed pieces, and articles in the American press praising the Zairian government.

In 1998, Paul Reitsma, former member of the Legislative Assembly of British Columbia, was accused of writing letters to newspapers under assumed names praising himself and attacking his political opponents. A Parksville newspaper had asked a former RCMP handwriting expert to compare a sample of Reitsma’s handwriting to that of letters to the editor submitted by a “Warren Betanko”, and then ran a story entitled “MLA Reitsma is a liar and we can prove it”. For this, Reitsma was expelled from the caucus of the British Columbia Liberal Party and then compelled to resign his seat after it became obvious that an effort to recall him would succeed.

Recent examples
* In 2001, the Los Angeles Times accused Microsoft of astroturfing when hundreds of similar letters were sent to newspapers voicing disagreement with the United States Department of Justice and its antitrust suit against Microsoft. The letters, prepared by Americans for Technology Leadership, had in some cases been mailed from deceased citizens or nonexistent addresses. Similar allegations were levelled against the “Freedom to Innovate Network”, originally portrayed as an independent grassroots organization but web-hosted by Microsoft.

* USA Next, a seniors’ organization that supports the privatization of Social Security, has also been accused of being an astroturf group funded by corporate interests, especially those of pharmaceutical companies.

* In recent years, organizations of plaintiffs’ attorneys have established front groups such as Victims and Families United and the Center for Justice and Democracy to oppose tort reform.

* A supposedly grassroots “teen” protest against alcohol advertising held in Washington at the Beer Institute was actually organized by the National Youth Advocacy Assembly, a group funded by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. (National Youth Advocacy Assembly)

* In March 2006, a supposed environmental group called the Save Our Species Alliance was exposed as a front group that was created by a timber lobbyist to weaken the Endangered Species Act. The campaign director for this group is Tim Wigley, the Executive Director of Pac/West Communications. Wigley was also the campaign director for Project Protect, another front group that spent $2.9 million to help pass President Bush’s Healthy Forests legislation which has been criticized for its pro-industry bias. “The Save Our Species Alliance web site portrays itself as a grassroots organization against the Endangered Species Act (the word “grassroots” is mentioned no less than five times on their “Take Action Now” page), but is criticized by environmentalists for being a front group for wealthy cattle and timber interests which consider Federal environmental legislation an impediment to profit.

* In the 2005 general election in the United Kingdom, the Labour Party packed press conferences with party workers who appeared as genuine, concerned members of the public. The Labour Party, The Conservative Party and the Liberal Democratic Party workers also sent letters to the local press purporting to be ordinary members of the public; all of the letters fit a common template covering specific party issues. Aside from deceiving the readership, such tactics also deny space to genuine local residents. (New Labour’s use of astroturf tactics was exposed by a UK Channel Four team with the use of an undercover reporter, shown in May 2005 – see below.)

* Slobodan Miloševic, a former authoritarian leader of Yugoslavia, also used astroturfing by broadcasting, on state television, numerous “letters of support” containing emotional expressions of love and support for his policies, creating an artificial impression of legitimacy.

* Wake Up Wal-Mart is an organization that claims to be “grass roots” but is funded and run by the United Food and Commercial Workers International Union. The group’s website pages are clearly marked as copyrighted by the UFCW Union, but public statements emphasize instead its “grassroots” nature.

* Wal-Mart Watch was originally funded by the Service Employees International Union (SEIU). According to the Wall Street Journal, Wal-Mart Watch is mainly funded by Five Stones, a 501(c)(3) organization that received $2,775,000 in 2005 from the SEIU. The Wal-Mart Watch “About” page clearly discloses connection with Five Stones, the name and SEIU affiliation of its President Andy Stern, and the names and affiliations of other board members. The SEIU reportedly gave Five Stones $1 million in 2004 to start Wal-Mart Watch.

* One recent project of Working Families for Wal-Mart is its website PaidCritics.com, devoted to exposing the astroturf origins of such Wal-Mart critics as Wake Up Wal-Mart and Wal-Mart Watch. In a nice touch of irony, Business Week recently disclosed that despite its own grass-roots imagery, “Working Families for Wal-Mart” was created, run, and paid for by Wal-Mart’s PR firm Edelman. The “About” page of Working Families for Wal-Mart does not reveal the group’s connection to Wal-Mart; the group’s mission is said to include “fostering open and honest dialogue”.

* Verizon aired ads in spring 2006 where a group set out on a cross-country quest to film a documentary finding out why consumers favored Verizon.

* In May 2006, SanDisk launched a site called iDon’t, appearing to be a blog started by individuals opposed to Apple’s domination of the portable music player market. It’s actually an advertisement mechanism for their own device, the Sansa e200.

* In October 2006, Nestlé, the manufacturer of “Nesquik” powdered milk flavoring, sponsored the “Lactose Tolerance” campaign, where activists tried in the manner of Greenpeace and Children International to solicit public support for flavored milks as equal to regular milk.

* The Center for Consumer Freedom which claims to be a “nonprofit coalition of restaurants, food companies, and consumers working together to promote personal responsibility and protect consumer choices” is a corporate front group targeting actual grassroots organizations, such as PETA (referred to as “animal liberation activists”), Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine and the Center for Science in the Public Interest (labeled “food police.”) The Center for Consumer Freedom sponsors a number of anti-activism Internet campaigns, including ActivistCash.com, AnimalScam.com, CSPIScam.com, PetaKillsAnimals.com, PhysicianScam.com.

* In August 2006, a science journalist for the Wall Street Journal revealed that a YouTube video – “Al Gore’s Penguin Army” – which was claimed to be an amateur work in fact came from the computers of DCI Group, a Washington, D.C.-based PR firm whose acknowledged leaders all have ties to the Republican Party and whose client list includes ExxonMobil and General Motors. (See Al Gore’s Penguin Army video controversy.) This hoax was discovered when journalist, Antonio Ragalado, noticed that the YouTube video was the first sponsored listing when he performed a Google search for Al Gore. The fact that someone was actually paying to have the alleged amateur film promoted was in itself suspicious.

* Since the spring of 2006, American Airlines has received frequent accusations of astroturfing due to its acknowledged support (including some financial backing) of Stop and Think, a Dallas-based organization that has advocated the retention of the federal Wright Amendment ban on most long haul commercial passenger airline service at Dallas Love Field. Many opponents of the Wright Amendment believe that American, the dominant passenger airline at nearby Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport, has an overly cozy relationship with the management of DFW Airport and/or uses overly aggressive competitive tactics against other airlines that serve DFW, and that for airline competition in North Texas to increase substantively, the federal government must repeal the Wright Amendment and let Love Field be an alternative to DFW for airlines flying long haul routes to and from North Texas. Therefore, these critics think that the Wright Amendment unduly limits the competition that American faces in the North Texas commercial aviation market and that American is using Stop and Think to try to manipulate the public into backing the law — and, by extension, the airline’s commercial interests — under a pretense of broad-based community support.

* In July 2006, an article by Vladimir Socor, a veteran analyst of east European affairs for the Jamestown Foundation, claimed that a report on Transdniestria issued by the International Council for Democratic Institutions and State Sovereignty, “State Sovereignty of Pridnestrovie (PMR) under international law”, was a Russian-sponsored attempt at disinformation. A spokesperson for the organization, Megan Stephenson, has denied these charges. Shortly afterwards The Economist published two articles highlighting the ICDISS’s lack of a physical presence and its disinclination to provide independent verification of its activities and previous existence. The Economist also reported that prominent academics cited as sources in the ICDISS report on Transdniestria disclaimed any connection with the organization. The Economist noted the Wikipedia entry for ICDISS created as part of the apparent disinformation exercise.

* In December 2006, the “All I want for Xmas is a PSP” marketing campaign by Zipatoni and Sony sparked outrage from the gaming community when it was discovered that the fake blog was in fact assembled by a marketing team. (See PlayStation Portable#Controversial advertising campaigns)

* In January 2007, the Chicago Tribune reported that Commonwealth Edison (ComEd) was behind Consumers Organized for Reliable Electricity (CORE), an organization that had been running television ads in Illinois against a proposed statewide freeze in electricity rates. The television ads did include any reference to ComEd, despite the fact that ComEd has provided $10 million dollars of funding for CORE, whose advisory board is peppered with members tied to ComEd.

Telecom astroturf
Dionne Searcey, in the article “Consumer Groups Tied to Industry”, in the Wall Street Journal, Tuesday March 28, 2006, p. B4, names some telecom groups as astroturf:

* Consumers for Cable Choice. Funding from Verizon Communications, Inc. and AT&T, Inc.

* Keep It Local New Jersey. Funding from New Jersey Telecommunications Associates; the WSJ indicates this is a coalition of various telecoms including Time Warner Cable and Cablevision Systems Corp.

* New Millennium Research Council. Funding from Verizon Communications Inc.

Other known telecom astroturfing groups:

* Video Access Alliance. Created by Netcommunication for an unknown client

* Hands Off the Internet, (http://handsoff.org/). Reported by Kos in Daily Kos

* Advanced Technology Alliance, funded by AT&T.

Fictional examples
Government astroturfing, as well as other sneaky tricks including an eleven-day war waged to distract from a sex scandal, are depicted in the film Wag the Dog.

The satirical newspaper The Onion had an opinion piece entitled “I’d Love This Product Even If I Weren’t A Stealth Marketer,” which is written by a young employee of Pepsi-Cola, who is paid to astroturf.

In the Christopher Buckley novel, Thank You For Smoking, Nick Naylor mentions several astroturf groups, including a “Smokers’ Rights” group made up of Hispanic smokers which was called “Fumamos.”

See also
* Harry and Louise
* False flag
* Spin (public relations)
* Sock puppeting – a form of personal astroturfing common in Internet communities
* Working Families for Wal-Mart
* Viral marketing

Via Wikipedia

I believe that Edelman, on behalf of Microsoft and AMD, was completely transparent with all the blogger-recipients of those gifted sexy Ferrari laptops; I also don’t believe that Edelman, AMD or Microsoft demanded good reviews, merely hoped for the best. Via Wired, digg, MSTechToday, Laughing Squid, Scobleizer, istartedsomething, Slashdot, BL Ochman, Robert Scoble, Crunch Gear, WebPro News, WebMetrics Guru, Marketing Canapes, Tech Crunch, notgartner, and Ed Bott.

Edelman is in the business of promotion and Microsoft is in the business of sales; influencing the influencer is key in a new media Cluetrain market economy of tipping points and markets as conversation.

If you Don’t Have the Latest Hardware with Tons of RAM then Vista is a Pig

The biggest techies don’t often have the best gear. These Ferraris show off Microsoft’s pig of a bloated OS, Vista, in the light both Microsoft and Edelman demand. They may be guilty of trying to load the deck, but I doubt they’re guilty of bribery.

Although I only worked on the Online Advocacy team in Washington for three months, I was alway instructed to engage bloggers thusly, “Hi, my name is Chris Abraham, and I work for Edelman on behalf of Wal-Mart.” My responsibility was to be transparent to the blogger. After that, it was the blogger’s responsibility to pass it forward.

Edelman Needed to be Hands-Off Once the Delivery Was Made of the Laptops

One might say that it was Edelman’s responsibility, a la noblesse oblige, to review the bloggers and their blogs and to remind those bloggers who had yet to disclose their gift (the way that PayPerPost does now).

If Edelman did all the follow-up due diligence then the gift would be tainted. It wouldn’t be a gift. The product, software, and the chip wouldn’t be speaking for themselves. It would be as if the gift was, in fact, a bribe. Additionally, bloggers are not journalists. Although Edelman is required under their WOMMA and industry responsibilies, bloggers can do whatever we want. We’re not held to disclosure requirements since we’re private citizens.

The blowback here has less to do with Edelman, AMD, or Microsoft. It has to do with the bloggers. The bloggers who failed to be fully transparent broke trust with their readership. I discuss this in my article, Whether Journalist or Blogger, Honor the Trust You Have Been Given, “so, what he means is that the writer, be he a proper journalist or an improper blogger, is judged of course what he writes but also by what he does.”

If you demand transparency and disclosure, you could also require any number of things. I think, in terms of strategy, it is a better strategy to identify the influencials, the make the offer of the gift, to be completely transparent, and then to allow the recipient to either disclose or not. It is such a tar baby. Edelman would have been damned if it did or damned if it didn’t.

I Believe that Edelman did Exactly the Right Thing in the Case of the Acer Ferrari Laptops

What is Edelman’s responsibility when it comes to enforcing transparency? My responsibility to bloggers was to be transparent on three levels: my real identity, my real company, and the company for which I worked. The expectation here was that the blogger just might post my entire email online, so no funny stuff. (Yes, that example was shameful, that’s for sure. But I made all of those mistakes so that you don’t have to.)

Here’s another, another, and another.

UPDATE: Microsoft wants their laptops back.

Whenever you engage the Internet on behalf if a company or organization, you are acting as a brand ambassador. If someone is curious as to who you are and why you’re so passionate about an event, product, or service, the understanding is that they will pretty easily be able to find out that you’re a marketing professional.

For some, that is enough. Legally-speaking, it is enough. In terms of building a long-term relationship with your current, future, or present customers, hiding your identity as a professional marketer in the folds of your online profile may be considered deceitful.

You may be attracted to covert online marketing: special ops, black ops, spycraft – “fifth column marketing,??? if you will. Don’t be.

The blowback that can result from using a false name, a false email (a Yahoo, Google, or Hotmail address created for the campaign and the false name), and a false bio, isn’t worth it.

There is a term for shooting for the short term by being opaque in your intent, no matter how effective it may be: astroturfing, which “describes formal public relations campaigns which seek to create the impression of being a spontaneous, grassroots behavior.???

Accusations of astroturfing can compromise the integrity of the organization you are representing, and further put your ability to communicate future messages in danger.

Over the short term, pretending to be just another denizen of an online community or a blog works if you can pull it off. It isn’t tough to sneak in and talk, talk, talk.

Even though your reputation online is more defined by your contributions to the conversations rather than who you are, the culture of the Internet doesn’t suffer being fooled, duped, or suckered.

If you are ever found out, you are screwed.

Via Abraham PR