RSC Partners, Inc.

This morning, an op-ed I wrote about California’s early presidential primary was published in the Los Angeles Times.

Normally, I would not be considered an expert in California politics. I know my way around, but there are many others who could give a similar point of view for the paper.

However, because of my blogging at Spot-on and LA Voice, the opinion editors took notice and when they were looking for a certain perspective on the issue, approached me and asked me to submit something.

The lesson here is that getting a blog and writing is a good way to establish an expertise and get noticed!

The Washington Post today profiles the role of new media in electoral politics. Calling blogs and other online media “unruly,” the Post notes that current scandals engulfing Sen. George Allen and former Rep. Mark Foley, “percolated” online before hitting the mainstream press.

I don’t want to accuse the Washington Post of being late to the party, but the observation seems painfully obvious. Since Matt Drudge broke “Monica-gate”, Internet media has consistently beaten the MSM to the punch on just about every important story (political or otherwise) and in doing so has set the tone for all subsequent coverage.

As for being “unruly”, I think I can speak for the entire blogosphere when I say, “Guilty as charged.”

The blogosphere is the ultimate manifestation of the First Amendment right to free speech. While some bemoan the lack of “best practices” or “prevailing journalistic standards” online, this unregulated, pure, unadulterated freedom of expression is precisely what gives the new media its power to incubate news.

According to the Post, aides to Bill Clinton say that the former President believes that both Al Gore and John Kerry lost their elections because they “could not effectively respond to a modern media culture.” Truer words have never been written and may this be a lesson for candidates, businesses, or anyone courting public opinion.

A lawsuit filed yesterday in Alameda County (CA) Superior Court reveals that certain special interests are using the Internet to take electoral deception to new heights (or depths– depending on which side you’re on!).

Proposition 87, which appears on the ballot this fall, would impose a surtax on oil production in California. Predictably, the oil companies hate Prop 87; the activist community (led by the measure’s champion, Steve Bing) loves it. In the words of Michael Buffer, “Leeeet’s get ready to rumble!”

The “yes” on 87 guys preempted the “no” on 87 folks by buying up a slew of domain names that the “no’s” would love to own (e.g.: “noon87.com“). There is nothing unethical about squatting on domain names to keep them away from your opponent, but the “yes-men” went over the line when they set up bogus Web sites at these URL’s designed to whisk voters looking for anti-87 sites, directly into pro-87 Web-sites.

The oil companies sued, citing an obscure California law called the California Political Cyberfraud Abatement Act. They must have had a pretty strong case because the ink on the complaint wasn’t even dry before the “yes-men” offered to settle, giving the oil companies control of the domain names and/or directing viewers to the official “no” on 87 Web site, nooiltax.com.

The moral of this story is that, while the New Media is often viewed as the “Wild West,” there are journalistic standards and best practices that must be observed in the cyber world. This is what gives online content its credibility and influence.

The mistake the pro-87 backers made was to manipulate the truth when they could just as easily have gotten as much or more traction by simply being honest with the online media.

There are millions of bloggers activley reporting on the Internet every day. More than a few of them would happily report on the work that the “no” on 87 campaign is doing, and they would do so in a way that respescts ethical standards.

All the campaign had to do was reach out to the blogosphere and tell its story. Instead, the campaign tried to pull a fast one and its reputation has suffered as a result.

“Yes on Prop 87″ Group Sued Over Cyber No-No [Los Angeles Times]

Today’s Wall Street Journal reports that two massive consumer products companies, General Mills and Kraft, are embracing Internet advertising and doubling their commitment to online media. While some would argue that they are late to the party, this news is significant for two reasons:

1. “Packaged-goods” companies like General Mills and Kraft have literally spent decades designing and fine-tuning their advertising models, and any deviation from those tried and true models is rare to unheard of. This fundamental shift in their approach is a strong validation of the claim New Media can make on today’s consumers.

2. The products these companies make and sell– paper towels and toothpaste, for example– are not well suited for e-commerce. People don’t tend to Google “paper towels” and they don’t typically buy tubes of Crest online. Therefore, to make this investment in online media now, makes a clear statement: “This is where they eyeballs are and this is where we need to advertise our products.”

John Galloway, a PepsiCo, Inc. Vice President bluntly told the Journal: “Our job is to invest where consumers are engaging with media.”

Kevin George, a brand manager for Unilever, echoed this sentiment: “Ultimately it comes down to where the consumer is.”

According to Menlo Park consulting firm Knowledge Networks, 15% of the time US consumers spend with all media, is spent online. Whether you are selling paper towels or advancing a corporate or public affairs agenda, that is a market that is just too big to ignore.

Once-Wary Industry Giants Embrace Internet Advertising [Wall Street Journal]

The Los Angeles Times compares the media markets in New York and L.A. today, and finds the City of Angels lacking when it comes to Gossip columns.

While the number of publicists per capita in Los Angeles is among the highest in the world and gossip mongering ranks near the top of the city’s list of high-profile exports, there is no local equivalent to Page Six. In fact, the closest thing Hollywood has to Page Six is Page Six itself; the Post is available for home delivery here, and the column regularly covers and skewers the Southland’s rich and infamous.

But it’s not like Los Angeles lacks a media machine covering our own gossip. The Times cites no less than three bloggers–Deadline Hollywood, Defamer and Kausfiles–to talk about the local media obsession with celebrity. (Likewise, for non-Hollywood “gossip”, we like Mayor Sam and L.A. Observed.)

There’s a lesson there for the myriad publicists who haunt the streets of Hollywood–ignore the Blogosphere at your own peril.

L.A. to Page Six scandal: ho-hum [LAT]

Starwood Hotels has a new blog aimed at its preferred guests: www.thelobby.com. Unlike most corporate blogs TheLobby isn’t just an awkard restatement of corporate press releases. It tries– and mostly succeeds– to be engaging and conversational in a manner that will build a sustained readership. But that hasn’t stopped the critics.

Commenting in a Wall Street Journal article, Todd Copilevitz, a “digital marketing consultant,” laments the lack of reader comments on the site: “Blogs are not an environment where you just hold forth an opinion and don’t accept feedback… You have to have your wits about you to understand it’s not the same old PR machine.”

Mr. Copilevitz is right that a blog is not “the same old PR machine” but there are other ways to establish a relationship with readers than through comments.

TheLobby has a conversational tone that resonates with readers. Its authors have distinct voices and they create a discussion by linking to other blogs (unlike some blogs like the Huffington Post).

On the whole, we think TheLobby isn’t a bad corporate blog and we’d like to see more companies use the medium to communicate with their customers.

Starwood’s Web Log Caters To Loyalty [Wall Street Journal]

For awhile now, CNN has featured blogs as part of The Situation Room, but this week, the cable network went a step further in using blogs as a primary source.

When CNN.com ran its story on the arrest of a Homeland Security official, they took their picture straight from the pages of Joshua Michah Marshall’s Talking Points Memo.

While it’s just further evidence of the blogs’ influence over mainstream media, I have to wonder if at some point, the bloggers will rise up and ask that their work be credited. After all, don’t bloggers have rights, too?

What a difference a month makes. A few weeks ago, the New York Times sounded alarm bells over Wal-Mart’s effective use of the blogosphere to repair its image, claiming the strategy “raises questions”. This weekend, the Times hailed blogs as a transforming force in American politics.

The Times appears to have awakened to the fact that, unlike television advertising– the longtime backbone of political campaign outreach– blogs allow candidates to target segmented voter blocs directly and to reach geometrically larger audiences via peer-to-peer email distribution.

This is more than just an academic observation– candidates are, in fact, blogging. Specifically, the Times points out that John Kerry, John Edwards, and Mark Warner are scoring early points in the 2008 election through the blogosphere (the New York Times probably doesn’t know any Republicans, but rest assured, they are blogging too).

But this “new” medium is not for the faint of heart. One issue that candidates will have to get comfortable with is the interactive nature of blogging. Unlike a television commercial where a tightly scripted sound bite is delivered with no opportunity for rebuttal, blog readers give as good as they get. So candidates better be prepared to take a few punches in defending their platforms.

Blogs also could deal a potentially serious blow to the time-honored advantage of incumbency. With the efficiencies of the Internet, blogging is a cost-effective way for the cash-strapped challenger to reach voters on a scale similar to that of the deep-pocketed incumbent.

So, ultimately this is a win-wn. Campaigns have a new avenue by which to reach the electorate, and voters have a medum that will allow them to get beyond the spin and the sound bites into a serious discussion of the issues.

Let the games begin!

Politics Faces Sweeping Change Via the Web [New York Times]

While bloggers are gaining the respect and attention of everyone from politicians to businesses to sports franchises, the mainstream media is still struggling to come to grips with the phenomenon.

When Yost at the Michigan Football site The M Zone heard a segment on ESPN Radio Colin Cowherd’s show that seemed a little familiar, he pointed out that, well, the item was plagiarized from his site. Cowherd responds that he didn’t know, the item was emailed to him before making a big mistake: blowing the blogger off and telling him to get over it.

Cowherd may have been innocent enough in his using material that was emailed to him, but as a journalist he should know what it feels like to have his material stolen. In the world of a cut-and-paste internet, a little due diligence on Google could tell you whether credit is due. Telling the author of material to bugger off will only turn the blogs–and public opinion–against you.

As bloggers gain a larger audience, situations like this will continue to arise–and as much as anybody wants to talk about blogger responsibilities and ethics, a debate about blogger rights should be in the works as well.

The New York Times writes a highly critical but silly piece today on bloggers who have taken information from WalMart’s PR agency and posted the information on their sites.

Under assault as never before, Wal-Mart is increasingly looking beyond the mainstream media and working directly with bloggers, feeding them exclusive nuggets of news, suggesting topics for postings and even inviting them to visit its corporate headquarters.

But the strategy raises questions about what bloggers, who pride themselves on independence, should disclose to readers. Wal-Mart, the nation’s largest private employer, has been forthright with bloggers about the origins of its communications, and the company and its public relations firm, Edelman, say they do not compensate the bloggers.

But some bloggers have posted information from Wal-Mart, at times word for word, without revealing where it came from.

Glenn Reynolds, the founder of Instapundit.com, one of the oldest blogs on the Web, said that even in the blogosphere, which is renowned for its lack of rules, a basic tenet applies: “If I reprint something, I say where it came from. A blog is about your voice, it seems to me, not somebody else’s.”

At the heart of the story is criticism of IowaVoice blogger Brian Pickrell. Apparently he had cut-and-pasted copy from an email sent by P.R. firm about WalMart. I understand why as an ethical consideration, plagiarism is bad. As a blogger, if I am quoting someone else, you’ll see it in “blockquotes” even if it comes from an email they sent. Yet, as someone who has sent out press releases for years, I have seen smaller newspapers and magazines (with circulation similar to a medium-sized blog readership) reprint press releases word-for-word and call them articles. Does that make the cut-and-paste practice excusable? No. But I have to wonder when the New York Times will run a front page story on the local fish-wrapper!

Likewise, the Times makes itself look silly by implying that bloggers ought to be revealing the origin of their information—such as who sent them the sources or story ideas they link to. Hogwash. When was the last time you read the Times or any mainstream paper tell you that they were contacted by the MWW Group, Fleishmann Hillard or Hill and Knowlton?

To cast aspersions on the blogosphere or mainstream media as a whole because of these cases would be a mistake.

As blogs get taken more seriously, businesses, politicians and others will start taking notice. As they do, there will be a new market for public relations firms to facilitate the conversation between them. At RSC Partners, we believe that time has come.