With Great Power

Chris, almost exactly 2 years ago, I asked this question on a series of blog posts about influence:

“As people with influence, shouldn’t they (heart surgeons, infopreneurs, marketers, non-profit managers) be held to a HIGHER ethical standard than the rest? The question applies to everyone with influence. Yes, bloggers too.”

There were a few interesting comments too, you can read the entire context of the discussion here:

http://guydz.com/moneypowerwisdom/index.php/200…

I believe that, the more widely your words reach, the more you need to consider the weight and influence and impact of them before they are written or spoken.

Just because I trust somebody doesn't mean I believe everything they say.

I believe THEY believe what they say, which is a solid starting point for a conversation, but you know what they say about opinions.

We who write, or otherwise stand in front of a room of people in the hope of casting our personal brand of illumination on a topic, do so secure in the knowledge that we're providing the absolute best information we possibly can, and that everyone who listens is going to fall into one of three groups: believers; believers, but…; and non-believers.

One more thing I've learned I can be sure of. In six months or a year, or sometimes even the next day, I'll look at what I wrote, or a video of something I said, and I'll ask myself, “What the hell was I thinking?”

It comes with the territory, babe. Look at the heat Gladwell takes. Something tells me he doesn't lose a lot of sleep over it.

I will only read a blog on a recurring basis that I trust. This is built by the author who writes interesting posts that make me think and give rise to new ideas. For example, one of my daily stops is on Lifehacker.com. I love that site b/c they discuss things that interest me (lazy people solutions) and give plenty of insightful commentary or useful links. In fact, one of the first places I turn to in research (before Google) on a tech solution is searching Lifehacker. I don't know enough about how Google works to comment on their methodology, though this post has given me something to think about. In closing, I'm going to base my trust on experience with the blog rather than what Tech Crunch tells me. Sometimes you find nuggets that no one else is reading.

Interesting Chris, but without the original post, which I sadly missed, it's hard to see what the problem was. But whatever you said and however you phrased it, advertising a product that isn't in retailers, and those retailers not having any information about it or when it's likely to be available is a huge faux pas and frankly deserves strong criticism.

I also believe there's a real danger here in trying to temper reactions as our blogs and authority grows. I read your blog because I share many values with you – I read the Timberland story and it made my blood boil – it's exactly the kind of thing that really annoys me as a consumer.

The moment you stop writing about stuff like because of your feelings of responsibility is the moment you will start to lose your audience because you will not be being authentic.

Bacon and chocolate?

The power of the Internet enables us all to speak our mind and what our Google Rank (or any other ranking/list/whatever) should not hinder us from speaking your mind.

This is YOUR site. This is where you get to share YOUR opinions.

Maybe brands should pay more attention to what bloggers are saying. If Timberland really cared about what you said they'd comment on it. Maybe they can't fix the gripes you raised, but I know that just being heard is what you would want the most and that would go a long way.

People should be reading your blog and consuming your content because it comes from you. They should take both the good and the bad. The rambles and the rants. Don't ever not post something because of what others might thing. If YOU want to share it then please do.

Personally I connected more with your Timberland post then I have with many others recently because it spoke to me. Others will connect with other posts. That is the fun of what we are all doing here.

Don't change. Unless it is for the better. *smirk*

Chris, in a previous life I published a report for the insurance industry. We took no advertising to maintain editorial independence. At first, we were pretty “free wheeling” with our opinions and comments – but over time as we realized people were really paying attention to what we were saying and that we were driving discussion and influencing decisions we felt it was imperative to make sure we were acting in a very ethical and responsible way. It is expected that “thought leaders” will editorialize and critique. Yet, I found that criticism was easy – the harder part was suggesting positive action and viable solutions – defining a new course of action and identifying lessons learned.

To be the number one blogger in the industry is very much like being the older brother. You are the role model for your younger siblings, if you do something its most likely that they will copy and repeat everything you say (however annoying this might be). Reality is that if you have a large or the largest number of “younger brother and sisters” you have a greater responsibility and with great responsibility comes less freedom, at least to say what ever you want.

Chris,

Trust sells. The deceptions that we see many less-than-scrupulous Internet marketers use wholesale come back to haunt them in the long run. Look at the FTC requirements about testimonials/affiliates (that go into effect TODAY everyone) that are the result of abused trust. These regulations are meant to insulate the 70% that believe what they read online.

Thanks for your work/thoughts!

s.c.

I agree with MikeCJ — it is a slippery slope you or any blogger travels if you have to temper reader reaction. You end up in the bland oatmeal world of political correctness saying nothing worthy of note at all.

Your authenticity is why I read your blog — and your newsletter and your book.

I'm seeing some corollaries here, on a small scale, with the infamous Oprah vs Beef Industry flap some years back. The true issue of food safety took a back seat to the (manufactured?) issue of whether Oprah had the right to speak out.

The discussion on IF you should speak your own opinion in your own blog and HOW you should do so is obscuring the true issue IMO –crappy customer service and probably also store operations. (Timberland, however, is far from the only retailer with these issues on its plate. )

Chris,

Being that I'm not an SEO/SEM guy, I struggle to consistently understand it all. Thanks for the brief, easy to understand tips. I knew the part about links. I was not aware exactly how all the ranking stuff works, and I definitely wasn't aware that Google takes into account “how” you place a link in your blog posts.

That will make me think about the placement of links in my posts from now on. Just one more thing I can do to get more traction for my blog.

Thanks.

It's true that people do come to you for ideas and probably a lot of guidance. I agree that everyone has the right to an opinion, even when they don't agree. However, you have both directly and indirectly reminded of some very good points about human business.

1. Customer service is a big part of customer satisfaction. (Doesn't matter how great your product is, consumers still need courtesy and respect.)

2. The franchises need to all have the option to order a product for you. Especially the attendant (who may have just been having an off day?) at Timberland could have probably said, “We don't have any in stock, but let me pull up timberland.com and we can have a pair here for you to try on in a few days” instead of: “Sorry, we don't have any of those in yet, try Macy's.” (Though, I'm sure Macy's appreciated that. :)
and

3. Even when blogging we “catch a lot more flies with honey that with vinegar.” (LOL, my mom used to say that all the time.) I have to always re-read my posts and comments, because sometimes I get into a train of thought and inadvertantly sound too “bubbly” (even about new technie information LOL – can't help but be kinda geeky and excited sometimes :) or kinda like a “know-it-all”.

Oh well, Chris, live and learn, then get Luvs right? ;) You have the right to share experiences with us, but you really do have the “power” to help or not help so much with your writing. Kind of a big responsibility huh. :) That's why it's yours. – Does that make sense? Anyways: Own it.

Justin – great comment and agree. Loved this sentence: “You on the other hand, are climbing up Maslow's Hierarchy every day and this post validates your desire to reflect on self and consider your actions in pursuit of wisdom.”

I love this post – it's a topic I've rarely seen discussed. I think we have to realize that blogging is a public act, no matter how many or few people are reading. Bloggers may tend to hide behind their computers, but the output is visible to the world and as such we have to take responsibility for that, just as we should take responsibility for the things we say in public – whether it's to a couple of friends or to a large audience. Personal responsibility applies to bloggers too…

The more social media moves toward “What do these measurements mean and what should I do next?” pushes us at PostRank to chew more on precisely these notions of what audience engagement really means. Social hubs, audience engagement, discrete events… these are all things, but they're done by real people, and trust and other interpersonal ties are representative of different types and levels of relationships.

That's the core, really, of why we don't weight all engagement events (comments, tweets, diggs, etc.) the same, because they don't represent the same amount of effort or interest, and, more “humanly”, they don't represent the same levels of trust or exchange of social capital.

Of course, it can get sticky and uncomfortable pretty quickly when you start laying down concrete measurements for human interactions. Seems… mercenary, perhaps, especially when business makes use of it. But at the same time, we all already do it, and have been since there were two people on earth to start interacting and trying to persuade and influence each other. :) The internet just enables us to see it at work, participate in it, and break it down better than previous methods.

I was one of those that supported the original take and was disappointed when you edited the article. I think it is just as damaging to temper your opinion as it is to let it run wild.

I'm an educated consumer and although I respect your opinion, a single blog post is not going to get in the way of my own wants, needs, or desires. I might consider it as a factor, but overall it doesn't have much effect.

On a side note, if Timberland's SEO is so poor that your post would instantly outrank everything else, then that's their problem.

Chris,

I appreciate the point you make about how one's Blog can affect other sites positively or negatively. I think your use of the Spiderman quote is quite appropriate.

It is obvious to me that you are a person who puts lots of thought and care into what you write. This is only proven by the way you re-wrote your Timberland post. I saw the original and then the re-write. The fact that you cared enough to go back and revisit the post is why I consider your postings trustworthy.

I vote that you should be named poster child for the 'Blog with Integrity' site.

Chris,
Excellent way to turn this experience around for us to understand and take away. I read through your blog, and in fact, I understood as you noted, writing as a consumer. Simple. And you are right! It was an issue between advertising, operations and customer service. You came to expect, like anyone of us, that those shoes would be there, and they weren't and worse: customer service had no clue what you were talking about.

On my end, individuals bilingual [Spanish+ English] or not come to rely on what I blog, partly because of my work, partly because they know me, and others who ran across my work. I take this responsibility very seriously, and try to be as human as possible. Not sure if this is resulting in actionable items, its something I need to continue working on. Most of my audience is direct through face to face (recruiting and consulting) and the blog simply is an outlet.

From the dozens of blogs I read, I take them seriously because they are authentic and speak to me. That is why I continue reading your blog and following your work.

Keep writing on Chris!!!
David

Wow, thanks for the great read! It was worth clicking through the GooReader.

;)

Well, you're not the person I goto first everytime, however, I do make an effort to read you when I can, like this article. Thanks for a great post again, as always, Chris.

You are “The” Chris Brogan. I am a Broganite. We both admit to our parts. It is because you are humble, consider others before yourself, and are a true community builder that I follow. And I'm sure I'm not the only one. I'll respect anyone who respects their responsibilities to a Religious extent. It's a welcomed change. It's that kind of passion that's been lacking in my life.

That being said, if I were to wager a guess as to why this “Timberland” event marches on, it is because you were so afraid to break the trust you've worked so hard to build up that you've overcompensated. And because of it two natural 2.0 rules were broke.

1) Adding content instead of rewriting content
2) Taking a chance to turn a negative into a positive

Buddy, you weren't going to bring down Timberland with your rant. You're not that cool yet. Not only that, in fact, on a scale of 1-to-10, you're rant was a 3 at best. And it was because you were 1) not mindless ranting 2) mindful of your influence, and 3) dead-on right. Timberland should understand that even in the 21st century that people are still going to go to the store to check on heavily promoted brands from companies whose products they find in stores with frequency. Why Timberland wouldn't have Earthkeepers in stores in metro areas sounds like a pathetic mis-measurement of their target market. (There, I'll say it).

And you pointed it out. You have a right to create a buzz about it. And because of the buzz you could create (and yet still have), Timberland might have reconsidered their strategy. They might be up as I write doing so right now.

Hopeful end game: Timberland reconsiders putting EarthKeepers in stores, you write a positive post about the change, send a positive SEO link or two which neutralizes the negative post (and if they're really having a groundswell of negative anchor text, they have deeper issues), and everybody wins.

Since most 2.0 concepts come from hippie music, I'll point out what Lennon pointed out to McCartney in a letter: you are influential, but you are not the movement. You are a part of the movement.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-65…
(Yeah, John was mad. I am not)

And in the end, you make a lot of love. Don't be afraid to show it, even if it's stern.

In a similar vein:

Did you change the post because it might negatively impact YOUR brand?

<it never occurred to me that people might see others (me) as a trust agent

C’mon!

False modesty only goes so far and I think this is pushing it a little.

You're a great source of knowledge and I’ll always read your site but I think there’s an element of “The lady doth protest too much” in here.

PS – A link to the original article would also frame your arguments/revision a little better.

I trust you Chris; to offer advice, valuable content and direction to the entire community.

I also trust that you'll be human and consumer enough to narrate a bad experience, rant or not.

I read the Timberland piece and it sounded matter-of-fact; there was slight anger but that's to be expected. What I didn't see was of you foaming at the mouth and tearing your hair out.

I believe it is your duty to direct us, and this is part of that expected direction.

Nothing less works for me.

I really like this! We so often forget the power our blogs, content, and even personas can wield. Sometimes it is not fair to use that against other people–what we often forget that companies are ultimately.

We often think of companies as big ugly ogres; however, in reality they are made up of investors that take big risks (for gain of course), working stiffs like you an me, families that rely on that company being successful, towns that need that company to stay in business, etc…

I like you choice and you way of educating us. Maybe suggesting a better way is a good best practice over the rant and scorched earth approach.

Thanks for learning out loud. It helps me.

Thanks, Ben. I appreciate your ideas.