Whatever...

Anonymity vs. Privacy: where do you stand on the web?

In this world of Web 2.0, most of us have online identities (and sometimes several of them),  represented within social networks, on blogs and within the forums and comments sections of other websites. 

Just as in real life however, we tend to display different faces to different audiences; you might not, for example, post the same content to your LinkedIn page as you would to your Facebook profile.  Call it self-preservation or privacy, but many people like to control what personal information is accessible. 

Nevertheless, problems can arise when that degree of secrecy becomes full-blown anonymity; throw trolling into the mix and the whole issue becomes a lot more complicated.  Vitriolic tweeters and bloggers, empowered by their hidden persona, can cause real damage and reveal the ugly side of user-generated content and the social internet. 

So, should identity be transparent?  If so, when?  And is total anonymity acceptable?

The subject has dichotomised users and unsurprisingly, with clearly vested interests, the internet behemoths have all adopted positions.  Google pinned its colours to the mast some time ago, in December 2009, when the then CEO, Eric Schmidt, espoused his infamous opinion that, “if you have something that you don't want anyone to know, maybe you shouldn't be doing it in the first place.” 

Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg, on this issue if nothing else, takes a similar line to that of Google and perhaps goes even further, proclaiming in David Kirkpatrick’s book ‘The Facebook Effect’ that “having two identities for yourself is an example of a lack of integrity.” 

On the other side of the coin are those who argue the importance of unencumbered content sharing, for reasons of security (such as during the ‘Arab Spring’ recently) or to promote freedom of expression and creativity.  4Chan founder Christopher “Moot” Poole is a high-profile supporter of this cause. 

To learn more about the arguments for both sides, check out the infographic below.  With such powerful contenders, it’s a battle that will shape the future of the internet.

All you can write…

By Ingrid Daschner

I spend a lot of time – in both my professional and private life – on the web. This makes me one of the 72% of people aged 14 or over in Germany who are online. And finding something worth reading on all those forums, noticeboards and much-hyped social media platforms is like looking for a needle in a haystack. It’s precisely the people with the least idea about a subject, who have failed to acquire basic rules of language and spelling, who think the louder you shout the more right you are.  It is precisely these people whose mewling characterises this (the one thing they can agree on) oh so useful medium. 

But why should this be? Well, I believe that the decline in standards on the internet is due to the democratisation of the medium; in the realisation of the idea of enabling anyone, at any time, to contribute to “actively shaping the web” for next to no financial outlay. The decline of the internet is the result of flatrate internet access. This is what makes it possible for people to stick their oar in wherever and whenever they feel the need. And this genus of people appears to have a strongly conditioned need to tell you what they think. The social rules which ensure that in real life such perpetual irritants quickly find themselves without an audience just don’t work online. Anyone behaving this obnoxiously in my local pub will soon find himself out on his ear. If you shout and scream your way through school, you’re going to spend a lot of time sitting outside the headmaster’s office (unless of course you’re a teacher). Sadly, however, it just doesn’t work this way online. 

As popular German comedian Dieter Nuhr once put it, "If you don’t have a clue, just keep your mouth shut!" 

I’ll sign up to that.

 

 

And the SABRE Award goes to....

This week, the Recommind account team travelled to Prague for the annual SABRE Awards, held in the magnificent Prague Castle.

Despite having to wake up before we sometimes go to bed to catch our flight, we were spoiled to have a stunning day of sightseeing around the Czech capital before trying to hide our sunburn and getting dolled up for the awards do.  

The best part of the evening was that as well as being shortlisted for the ‘Technology – software and services’ category, the Recommind campaign, InfoRiskAwareness, won an Iron award for best website.  Here’s a picture of Bex Surtees, Lindsey Challis and Fiona Halkerston from the Recommind team with the award.

A tough lesson in PR

By Laura Mead

I don’t think any of us have escaped the news hitting the headlines this week that Facebook has unabashedly hired a mainstream PR agency to carry out a smear campaign against Google – particularly after our very own Ginnia Cheng blogged about at the end of last week.  However, just in case you’re reading us for the first time...

After numerous rumours of who was behind the Google bashing, journalist Dan Lyons broke the story that it was Facebook that brought Burson Marsteller on board to carry out the FUD campaign.  The news comes after an influential blogger published an email exchange with the agency online when the Burson Marsteller employee in question refused to disclose its client.  The plot thickened when USA Today then accused Burson Marsteller of offering high profile media outlets news and op-ed stories about how Google’s ‘Social Circle’ networking tool ‘violates the privacy of users’. 

If this isn’t a lesson in how not to do PR, I don’t know what is.  While it’s really not overly surprising to hear that the search giant is getting picked on (again), what is unexpected is to hear that Facebook, acting so deviously, is behind the allegations, and that a PR agency of such good standing has stooped to a new low in getting involved in such an underhanded campaign. 

It feels wrong not to give Jim Goldman and John Mercurio – former CNBC tech reporter and former political reporter respectively and PR ‘masterminds’ behind this debacle – the benefit of the doubt, especially given their backgrounds.  However, I can’t help but question why any PR would take on a brief of this nature for any company – even Facebook, without doing their homework and without understanding and foreseeing the ramifications. 

And, where is the apology to Google?  Sure, Burson Marsteller has issued a statement detailing the agency’s lack of involvement as a whole, saying that this is not standard operating procedure for the firm – however, neither Burson Marsteller, its employees involved, nor Facebook (beyond its recent statement) has taken any responsibility yet.  The entire situation, from the start to the demise, seems to have been handled very poorly.  Surely past experiences, from Tylenol’s cyanide incident to the Exxon and BP oil spills, have taught us to stand up and take responsibility in the wake of such serious crises. 

With all of this, perhaps what’s most unfortunate from my perspective is that even though Facebook has clearly picked the fight and the PRs involved are old hacks themselves, ultimately it’s going to become just another setback for the PR industry as a whole.  Of course, it will also have serious repercussions on Burson Marsteller's reputation – but the question remains as to how it will affect the rest of the industry.  Our sector has always faced an uphill battle when it comes to reputation and this will certainly be tough damage to overcome, given the likely impact this crisis alone will have on the entire sector.    

 

PR Fail: Facebook’s not so stealth moves

By Ginnia Cheng

The score is in: Google 1 – 0 Facebook.

In a scandalous turn of events, it’s been reported that Facebook hired top PR firm Burson-Marsteller to launch a smear campaign against its bitter tech rival Google.  Leaked emails, which came to light on Wednesday, indicated that the global PR agency contacted well known internet security blogger Christopher Soghoian (among others), asking him to write scaremongering stories about Google’s privacy policies. 

In exchange, Burson-Marsteller offered to assist in the drafting and placing of these articles on influential sites, such as USA Today and the Washington Post – but Facebook’s cover was blown when Soghoian then published the emails online.  The correspondence also highlighted the blogger’s view that the company was in fact exaggerating concerns over the privacy threats and ‘making a mountain out of a molehill’.  

Fortunately for Google, this has all come to light just before the expected launch of its own social network, Social Circles, at its developer conference which kicked off earlier this week.  As a result, the anticipation and buzz surrounding Google’s latest venture in the social networking arena has reached an all-time high.

This spat follows a string of various accusations that large tech players have been throwing at each other, ranging from Google accusing Microsoft’s Bing of copying its search results, to Apple’s CEO Steve Jobs apparently accusing Google’s Android of privacy violations when the iPhone was under fire for privacy issues.

This latest instalment is far from good PR for the tech PR sector, and as the rivalry between the giants continues to grow, we can only hope that the tactics they employ don’t get much dirtier than this.

You've got (too much) mail

Much has been made of the rise of social networking and how services like Twitter and Facebook will see the use of email diminish.  Well, this might be true but it’s not happening yet.  In fact, according to a recent survey conducted by MarkTools , 96 percent (yes, 96!) of respondents felt that their email volume had actually increased (45 percent) or stayed the same (51%) over the last year.  As a PR, I can safely say that the volume of email I receive is just consistently (and painfully) high.  To celebrate email, check out the infographic below on its history.

Infosec: good old fashioned face-to-face fun

  By Flora Haslam

The last week in April has long been an important date in the calendars of tech PRs, journalists and employees of security companies – the traditional descent of branded stress balls, bikini-clad models and giveaway one-upmanship on west London for Infosecurity Europe.

I have a sneaking suspicion that at least one member of the Johnson King office has planned the timing of their wedding around the show, and although visitor numbers for this year are yet to be released – there will undoubtedly be a hit given its timing so close to Easter – how does the show apparently continue to go from strength to strength?

While German shows like CeBIT and IFA continue to draw in the crowds, along with specialist European events like Amsterdam's IBC and Barcelona's Mobile World Congress, UK trade shows as a rule are fading fast.  The demise of 360IT is a case in point, despite re-inventing itself, there simply doesn't seem to be a market for this kind of event in the UK.

Of course Infosec continues to draw interest from across Europe which helps to bolster its numbers and security is a booming sector – even in a recession you can't ignore the impact of a breach or the importance of data integrity so it's logical that the sector should be more buoyant than most.  What's somewhat surprising is – in the age of instant online communication (you can download information on the latest greatest security product in a matter or moments from the comfort of your desk) – that there's still a market for face-to-face networking.

Maybe what Infosec really shows us is that however much we rely on IM, LinkedIn and Twitter for day-to-day communication, we still relish the opportunity to catch up with old colleagues, hear first-hand the challenges being faced by our peers and of course convince ourselves that we're in with a chance of winning an Aston Martin!

 

 

What is a bookshelf with no books?

By Ben Roberts

I was massively sceptical about ereading devices – well, until the geek in me took over and bought a Kindle!  Since then, I feel like a weight has literally been lifted off my shoulders as I travel light with countless books on a single, slim device (ironically, I’m currently reading a hardback I was given for Christmas).  Ereaders are simply allowing people to enjoy books more easily – you can even have your favourite novels read aloud to you in a human-sounding voice.

Given my own great experience and what I’ve heard from friends, I wasn’t too surprised to read that UK ebook sales have risen 20 percent to £180m.  The growth in digital distribution has also seen an associated 3 percent fall in the volume of physical books sold.  It seems that consumer, academic and professional readers are all now increasingly turning to digital consumption.   Indeed, Richard Mollet, chief executive of the Publishers Association, says, "Academic and professional publishing, which embraced digital platforms over a decade ago, continues to lead the field. But now that technology is putting ereading devices into consumers' hands, we are starting to see the rapid growth of digital sales in this area too, as consumer publishers develop digital formats to reach wider audiences."

Undoubtedly there’s still a long way to go for the ereader, but with tablet devices achieving explosive success, smart phones running slick applications and Amazon and Apple delivering content relatively cheaply and simply, further success seems inevitable. 

If you know of any good ebooks to add to my ereading list, or indeed what to do with an empty bookshelf – let me know @bnrbts