The Myth of Evil Corporations in Social Media

September 17, 2007 · Comments

singapore skyline Want to rev me up? Equate the participation of corporations in social media discussions with “bad thing,” as Bill Weye insinuates in his worry piece about what might happen to PodCamp Boston, now that Microsoft signed up to participate. Here’s a very small snip-quote:

…but after looking at this growing list of companies (with some very big ones, like Micro$oft), I’ve been wondering how this “unconference” is going to change this year.

Markets are Conversations

If we are to go the route of the Cluetrain Manifesto, markets are conversations. Is Microsoft evil? Not at all. Do they do dumb things sometimes? Sure. Don’t we ALL do dumb things from time to time?

But didn’t you follow the “birth story” of Robert Scoble? He went from inside guy to OUR guy on the inside. The human face of the evil Borg. And that was the blending of social media and big organization that brought that around. Has Microsoft changed over the last several years? In some ways, especially around their consumer products, I’d say yes. Long way to go? Sure. But don’t we all? (By the way, Scoble just welcomed a new baby into the world. Drop by and wish him and Maryam and the family well.)

Sure, some organizations are more prone, perhaps through their culture, of doing things we don’t like. Great. So do we shun them, or do we communicate with them? Do we show them potential other ways? I say yes.

From Faceless to Human

It’s REAL easy to throw stones at a company. Earlier in the year, I found the startup where I worked, Network2, in a situation where a passionate community had some disapproval of how we’d done certain things with the product. And the fire from the community was hot. People were passionately against how we’d done certain things (it was essentially an opt-out vs. opt-in issue).

I found myself in the position of being the “face” of that organization, and showing people that I wasn’t a big company, or an evil corporation. I was a guy, a guy who made mistakes like everyone else, and a human. Further, I wasn’t just someone capitalizing on the community. I was part of it. So, three dozen apologies later, and lots of attempts to better understand people, I discovered a better path. I believe, all this time later, that what little standing I have with that community was earned by showing them that I’m a human representing an organization.

There Will Be Stumbles

There have already been several cases of “bad” social media participation. In some cases, it’s HOW things went down, like when Whole Foods CEO John Mackey snuck around on Yahoo forums posting anonymously for his gain. There have been the laptop scandals, and several less-clear situations.

Some people had issues with the so-called “blogola” accusations, where companies offered products to bloggers, and empowered them to try out the products, and if so inclined, blog the good and the bad. To this day, I think that DISCLOSURE is the key to all this. Others said that it was a more complex issue (one that I’m not interested in re-hashing, but YOU can, if you want, in the comments).

But aren’t stumbles better than letting corporations sit around and “do it all wrong” over and over again? Was GM wrong for the Tahoe campaign? I don’t think so. Rather, I think it was a matter of implementation. Should they try again? Another way? Damned straight.

Empowered Individuals

There’s a new world for you and me. It’s a weird mix, because in lots of ways, we’re now empowered in a way we weren’t only a handful of years ago. If we don’t like the shows we’re watching, we can make our own, or find the ones we want. If we don’t like the ads for the products we love, we can make our own. If we want NO ADS EVER, there are ways to make that happen, some more legal than others. We have power over our media consumption in a way we never did before.

And some say that this empowerment stretches into how we do our job. Remember, I’m a guy who left his cog-in-the-machine day job to pursue quite a rockstar fun time as a guy making events, immersing into social media, and doing what I consider the most fun you could pay me to have. I got that ALL from social media. I started by empowering myself with the knowledge I gained from podcasts like the great stuff of IT Conversations and some of John Furrier’s interviews with tech companies at PodTech. And from starting PodCamp with Christopher S. Penn.

But this empowerment goes in an interesting loop. Lots of us still work for big organizations. We now have knowledge and power that we didn’t have before. This gives us an opportunity to be effective for our organizations, AND it allows us to be our own brands within these organizations. The choice becomes ours, and with all things I’ve learned over the last 14 years, CHOICE is the most important metric in how we proceed with our careers and lifestyles.

Further Reading

Geoff Livingston, all around superstar, points out corporate participation studies here. There’s lots to this post, if you follow all the links. I think Geoff’s got the pulse just right, especially with who he references. Pay special attention to the case studies part.

What’s Your Take?

If we’re going to say that big companies don’t “get it,” shouldn’t we be helping them? One way I’m going to help is by encouraging corporations and marketers and investors and all the other people who are accused of not getting it to come to PodCamp Boston, to participate with the new media creators who’ve lived this stuff, and who are blazing trails because they weren’t really following the roads that came before anyway. I’m hoping for a two-way exchange of knowledge. There’s lots I want to ask of these organizations who are coming. And there’s tons I want us to show the people willing to come and meet with PodCampers.

So, are you part of the conversation, or are you in the “corporations are evil” camp? I want to know.

Photo credit, Christopher Chan

If you enjoyed this post, please consider leaving a comment or subscribing to the feed to have future articles delivered to your feed reader.

Tagged as:

ChrisBrogan.com runs on the Thesis Theme for WordPress

Thesis WordPress theme

Thesis is the search engine optimized WordPress theme of choice for serious online publishers. If you’re a blogger who doesn’t understand a lot of PHP, Thesis will give a ton of functionality without having to alter any code. For the advanced, Thesis has incredible customization possibilities via Thesis hooks.

With so many design options, you can use the template over and over and never have it look like the same site. The theme is robust and flexible enough not only to accommodate a site like ChrisBrogan.com, but also to enable the site to run far more efficiently than it ever has before.

  • As I mentioned to Bill on his blog post, I've been representing a corporation in student lending since I started podcasting, and so far I've managed to not screw up too much. :-)

    Remember Men in Black: a person is smart. People are stupid. If the corporation in question appears stupid, then find a person IN that corporation, yank them out of the corporate bubble, and bring them to PodCamp. You never know who will be the next Scoble.
  • I would normally be the first to have a whinge when the corporations rock up to have a piece of the grassroots action but I think the great thing about an unConferance is the lack of formality.

    Don't forget the rule of two feet.. If you don't like a chat/discussion/room/person.. Get up and move on.

    A podcamp is what you (the individual) makes of it.

    Everyone has something to offer.

    Why not corporations..? Anyone know how big the bar tab is..?
  • Wow! Thanks, Chris!

    I am so with you on this. I just wrote a post last week called Six Reasons to Lighten Up on Businesses. All of the blogodrama is getting to be a bit much.

    It comes down to sugar or spice. We all know which one is more effective. No one wants companies to act the same way. But the only way to get them to engage in social media principles like transparency is to welcome them and have a two-way dialogue.

    Instead of crucifying companies we should let them know, "Hey, that's not cool, here's how we do it. Next time if you want to play, please abide by the rules." This approach is much more likely to yield results.

    Some cos will never get it. But they won't build successful communities either. I think stating an even-keeled opinion and voting with our feet is a much stronger statement than throwing a tantrum.
  • Locally we have had Microsoft contribute to several unconference like events, the people they sent were intelligent and outside the corporate mold. They waved the Microsoft flag a bit, but they often put the boot in as well. They where as much a participant as anyone else at the camps.

    This brings me to Adobe. Adobe in Australia are about to embark on cfCamp. And frankly I believe (hope I'm wrong) its just going to be an Adobe Roadshow. Adobe want to control the venue, alarm bell one. Adobe don't really want Microsoft there, only small local sponsors (alarm bell two), They are dominating the program schedule, alarm bell three and finally they are not really embracing the people that turn up to present are the right people. They are over organising it. Are they cashing it, frankly IMHO yes.

    Is it me or does this sound like they are just not getting what a *camp is all about. People have tried to tell them. Sadly they are appealing to the Adobe FanBoyz, and that is part of the problem, a lot of these people are not used to *camps (in Australia), and will just follow Adobes lead. Lets hope I'm totally wrong, eh.
  • Chris, this is a good summary of an issue many of us are dealing with. I like your suggestion to get some of these corporations in a room with people who are living and breathing this stuff.
  • About this - If we’re going to say that big companies don’t “get it,” shouldn’t we be helping them?

    Yest. morning in Facebook I happened upon a group that totally irritated me because the person that started it, started a discussion thread with this question: Corporations are losing so much time to staff using FB, but how can their marketing dept leverage it?

    Does this sit wrong with anyone else? So, yes, I agree that it's our job to help spread the word (& I maybe tweeted a call to action which resulted in 4 of us responding gently that FB is a productive tool).
  • Hi Chris:
    Long time reader, first time commenter. An unconference is what the organizers and attendees make of it. You can plan one that is simple and small, with no budget needs. Or you can go big and make one that will appeal to a larger crowd.

    We went big with BarCamp Nashville. We had larger sponsors involved for several reasons: sponsorship dollars that we can put back into the event (ie. bar tabs, food, keynote speakers, goodies, etc.); building awareness, bigger corps. tend to help spread the word, both internally and externally; for first time unconference towns, the sponsors helped us build credibility to ensure a large attendance (and it worked); and finally, to help attendees rub shoulders with the big kids (networking for students to sales people).

    Thanks Chris. Keep up the great work. I love reading your blog and tweets.

    Cheers,
    Dave
  • Dani Diaz from the local Microsoft Developer's den came to Podcamp Philly and generously donated a fully tricked out XBox with Guitar Hero that lots of pople had fun playing with, and someone was lucky enough to walk home with as well. And poor Dani did get some Mac vs Microsoft heat from the crowd. No one pretended to be fan.

    I have a PC and a Mac; and I am glad to have had people from Apple come teach a Garageband class, and to have Dani from Microsoft coming and looking to see what was happening and who might be dying to create new and better apps for his company. Where better to look than in our midst?

    I want every company to get it; to look beyond a sliver of focus groups telling you what you want to hear, to looking to what we want, think, feel, need, and how "we" interact with "your" product.

    Corporations, businesses of all sizes and shapes, want it to be an outstanding success- their product or service needs to be fantastic. I want them to release thngs that simply make me say _WOW! and I need that/want that.

    But they can't read my mind, and their best chance to "get it" is to engage us and ask us, and that's what we all want anyway, right?

    Let's all be people and friends helping each other; let's get away from the battle zone mentality, the us vs them that is so destructive.
  • I'm tired of hearing people personify corporations (and government, for that matter).

    In Washington state, where I live, you only need one person to form a corporation, and I, therefore, am a corporation. Am I disallowed from participating? What if my corporation were five people? 10? 250? At what level do we lose our humanity? Should we stop at a certain level of success? What about corporations that need 1,000 employees to replicate the same kind of success that another type of business can do with one or two?

    I suddenly have a strong urge to re-read Atlas Shrugged.
  • When brands are part of our day to day lives, why shouldn't they be accessible via new/social media?

    Brands make statements in their advertising, in their service, in their utility. They impact our lives every time we interact with them.

    If social media is part of our lives, then why should they be there as well, particularly when it comes to service, user empowerment and enhancing the social media experience?

    Sure, we don't want Facebook spam, but there is still plenty of opportunity for open collaboration apps brought to you by Microsoft (much like those currently offered by Zoho).

    Why would you want to slam the door on a good thing?
  • Rather than complaining about "evil corporations," people should instead be willing to become agents of change and transform those organizations.
  • Wonderful, as I was just thinking about a similar kind of post in German, something along the lines of "what you should do and not do when attending a barcamp as corporate".

    And yes, they should come, see and learn. If they are willing to learn, they are welcome. If they are not, then they are as unwelcome as anyone else.

    Plus just like with childreen, they need somebody to guide them through the process. They are used to certain mechanisms which are natural to them but may be highly offensive to others - without the intention of being offensive they may not know what hits them.

    So yes, please. It is about tolerance on both sides - because many times those evil corporations are much more open than those "oh my god! somebody in a suit!!!! evil!".
  • @Gary- I think if Adobe wants to run a Camp, it just means that *.Camp like rules should prevail. I don't inherently mind if they run a cfCamp, because I think I'd want Adobe featured heavily in a camp about their product. Where they'd shine is if they worked hard with the Adobe hackers and Adobe critics and the Adobe naysayers, to bring that feedback (the useful stuff) back to the design headquarters. That would be cool.

    @Connie - that's scary, but I think there's a me-too feeling right now around social networks and social media. Some of that will suck, in plain English. And yet, there's a chance that some companies will pick it up and figure it out in a useful way. Where will WE be when they catch up? Quechup? Hmmm.

    @Dave - thanks. I'm a lover of yours, too. I think companies who are willing to buy beer for BarCamps are making a goodwill gesture. I'm grateful for the gesture. From there, I want to know what they want from my community. As the PodCamp gategeeper (with Penn and all the other Podling...), I am wary of who wants access to my community and how they'll engage them. And yet, I WANT decent companies to have good access, for two way conversations.

    @Whitney- I bet that was an informed experience for BOTH sides of the equation, especially if Apple and Microsoft took the step of listening to everyone in attendance, as I bet they did. Here's my question back: did people ENGAGE Apple and Microsoft, and take advantage of the opportunity of those people there?

    @Jon- great point. It's like when TV shows don't show someone drinking a Coke.

    @Nicole - you've totally just given me a good post to write. Thank you. I love the idea of writing up a guide for how *I'd* want people to engage my friends at these events. So, thank!
  • Ed M
    Hey, I'm not sure you've heard but Microsoft is no longer evil. Once it aquired the Catholic Church is became good. I'm telling you that reconciliation can even help the once evil now good Microsoft.
  • I think we can be hard on individuals as "representatives" for their whole companies. For example, if you've had a bad experience with a product, and you meet someone who works for that company, most people are not too shy about saying "You know, I had one of those, but it never worked right." or a simple "That sucks."

    And often the person you talk to has no power to change a thing, making you seem like an ass, and leaves them feeling like htey need to apologize or do something to make you feel better, but there's nothing they can do.

    Making constructive comments and critiques helps others get it "right." I just did this for a Verizon sponsored event for its new FIOS service on my blog, http://ldpodcast.wordpress.com/ and I was not paid a thing nor am I affiliated in any way to this event.

    But I sure want the people over at Verizon to know how to approach geeks like me to crave FIOS if only to get it in my neighborhood faster.

    The point here is this- it's about talkng about a company and their products with them, if possible, and perhaps picking up little things that can help them up their game. Everyone wins in that situation. Offer solutions, not just critique.
  • It is some kinda double edged sword. I face this in my open source evangelism. On one side, I face people from the free software community who just want to hold Microsoft as an evil empire and want to keep it out of open source. On the other hand, there are people like Matt Asay and Tim O' Reiley, who don't miss even a single opportunity to suck up to Microsoft's open source "attempts". My position in the issue goes something like this. Microsoft should be allowed to enter the open source world but not under their own twisted definitions of open source but by accepting the letter and spirit of open source licenses. As far as I am concerned, Microsoft should not be stopped from entering the open source arena but it can come in only if it accepts the letter and spirit of open source licenses. The same argument applies in the case of social media too. Microsoft should be allowed to enter social media circles but it should change its attitude and respect the customers and competitors. If we can ensure that Microsoft stays that way, I think we should embrace them into social media fold.
  • A relevant article to this discussion from the enterprise POV

    http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/fear_of_we...
  • Interesting post Chris. Oddly I've been thinking about a similar perspective. Corporations aren't evil, but mainly have the interests of their investors as the main goal to their success.

    What needs to be done is engage them, like you mention, but also to understand that it's hard to get the message to the inner core of decision makers. Sometimes it happens easier than others, but there are many levels of bureaucracy to get through to this group. That's quite a trick and what you propose helps bring attention to the process.

    My train of thought has been taking me down another realization though, that the corporatization of nearly everything from ball parks to restaurants my be part of the problem of participation in our physical society. Hmm, needs more thought, but the social interaction of any corporation will be a large part of it's success going into the future in my opinion.

    Regards,
    Rick
blog comments powered by Disqus

Previous post:

Next post: