Errors in the Echo Chamber
We have a client who was obsessed with getting their new 2.0-style company featured in TechCrunch.
We approached it the right way, through the right channels, with respect for the people and processes at Arrington's gig. We tried. We failed. It happens. Otherwise, the early reception in other media has been good.
But the client was obsessed with TechCrunch. Without consulting their SHIFT team, the company's founder left a critical comment at TechCrunch. The client basically questioned Arrington's integrity. This comment got picked up by ValleyWag. Which got picked up by Digg. Which led to Mr. Arrington posting at-length in defense of his integrity.
Some of the reader comments and blog posts that emerged in support of Michael Arrington questioned our client's PR counsel. Perfectly understandable. If a SHIFTer had given our client the advice to "piss off Michael Arrington," rest assured that that employee would be raking leaves right now.
In fact, though, our advice to the client PRIOR to the incident was, "Your judgment is impaired. Step away from the keyboard. Leave TechCrunch alone. Let Arrington run his blog, you should go run your business." The client agreed, but later suffered a late-night spasm of righteous indignation --- near an Internet connection. That's one of the dangers of working with entrepreneurs. "Passion" is a double-edged sword.
Our advice AFTER the incident was, "Apologize. Publicly. Now. Then, step away from the keyboard. Throw yourself on the mercy of the blogosphere and cross your fingers."
We'll see what happens.
Written from the SNCR conference --- where I am sitting in on a session on corporate blogging practices!
FYI, if you choose to comment today, you should know I'll be away from the computer most of the day, so your comment might not show up til later tonight or over the weekend. I ain't duckin' this one!
Tags: michael+arrington, valleywag, techcrunch, digg
Subscribe by Email
Click here for my LinkedIn profile
Comments
Fabulous! I love it! ;)
Man, this is what blogging is all about.
Thanks for providing another side to the arrington bash/love-athon.
Cheers
t @ dji
Posted by: Tony | November 3, 2006 12:50 AM
I'm glad you counseled the right thing.
As you probably already encountered the pingback -- it sounds like Mike Arrington has a genuine interest in how public relations deals with TC with him in the future.
http://www.crunchnotes.com/?p=302
In light of your own 10 points for constructing social-media friendly press releases, it should be an interesting conversation. ;)
Let us know how it turns out.
Cheers
t @ dji
(PS where's your contact form?)
Posted by: Tony | November 3, 2006 04:00 AM
Thanks for the kind words (and tip on the Arrington link). I am at todd (at) shiftcomm.com.
Since I am so open (so often) about my affiliations, people tend to find me pretty easily. But maybe I should add a Contact info link.
Posted by: Todd Defren | November 3, 2006 07:15 AM
Todd,
I've already commented on CrunchNotes and DJI, so I'll spare you too much musing. Suffice it to say, bravo for how you guys handled yourselves. Even the good fights are sometimes lost, I guess.
Posted by: JesseCiccone | November 3, 2006 09:17 AM
I think it's interesting that you wrote about it. I've had clients do this - rip off scathing emails to reporters. The last time it happened, it became a front page story on a major national newspaper and my client's stock dropped half before the market closed.
The stupidest thing any CEO can do is be reactive.
Posted by: Anonymous | November 3, 2006 12:20 PM
Great post. Congrats for the guts to say what needed to be said. This is the way to handle a PR crisis.
I wonder if you had to fire the client, or if things are getting smoothed over.
Posted by: John Koetsier | November 3, 2006 01:48 PM
That's a hard place to be I hope that everything resolves itself
Posted by: renaissance chambara | November 4, 2006 01:52 PM
Hang in there Todd. For decades, clients have chosen not to follow the advice of their PR agency. The big difference nowadays is the stakes are much higher for those decisions.
Posted by: Mike Spataro | November 6, 2006 09:37 AM
While I am completely sympathetic to the "renegade client" scenario and agree with your counsel to them, I don't agree with your decision to go public with telling the tale. It reads to me as a defense of your firm's reputation at the expense of your client's. Hard call, I know, as we at agencies are as much active participants in the marketplace as the clients. But nonetheless felt to me like a violation of client confidentiality particularly as it wouldn't be that hard to figure out who the client is. Where do we draw the line? My mind reels at the stories (and consequences) if we all started to spill the beans about client screw ups.
Posted by: Nancy Evans | November 14, 2006 05:08 PM