Facebook PR failure obscures real Google debate

/m/u/x/MichaelBarnett.jpg

Facebook’s decision to hire PR firm Burson-Marsteller, allegedly to ’smear’ Google, was a strange one. Not only that, the resulting headlines detracted from any substantive points Facebook might have been trying to make about online privacy. For its part, the social network says no smear campaign ever took place.

“Instead, we wanted third parties to verify that people did not approve of the collection and use of information from their accounts on Facebook and other services for inclusion in Google Social Circles, just as Facebook did not approve of use or collection for this purpose,” according to a spokesperson for the social network.

“We engaged Burson-Marsteller to focus attention on this issue, using publicly available information that could be independently verified by any media organisation or analyst.”

So Facebook admits it wanted to push negative stories. But its argument is that it doesn’t count as a smear.

Of course, the media focus was only ever going to end up being on Facebook’s tactics - not Google’s privacy policy. Now the dust has cleared, how many people even know what Social Circles is yet?

The PR campaign was both underhand and stupid. It involved Burson-Marsteller tipping off journalists as to the fact that Google’s new social search product collates public data about a user’s friends, drawn from social media accounts linked to their Gmail addresses. It does so without seeking the permission of either the account holders or of the social networks.

Of course, the PR firm had to get in touch with journalists to do this, not appreciating that the tip-off itself was the story. They would have been better off anonymously inviting tech bloggers to a multistorey car park.

If Facebook’s big hitters had addressed what Google is doing openly, they might have been more effective at creating a debate. For example, who owns the copyright to what we publish about ourselves on social networks? Should search engine spiders be free to crawl over all the personal details we put there? Should Facebook be able to stop them?

Perhaps Facebook was worried this would sound like the pot calling the kettle black.

Moreover, it might have drawn unwelcome attention to the real - commercial - reasons that Social Circles worries Facebook. Google is trying to create a hub site where all a user’s social updates can be gathered together and access provided to the content their friends share. Given this, why read your Facebook news feed?

Make sure you don’t miss a golden opportunity to network and glean valuable insights at this year’s Data Marketing show on 29 and 30 June. Click here to register

Readers' comments (1)

  • Beyond the unethical and improper tactics that Burson-Marsteller engaged in on behalf of Facebook, what is also disconcerting to me is that Facebook has now effectively closed the door to what is a much-needed debate within the tech and media industries regarding the ownership and sharing of online content. As you rightly note, had Facebook’s big hitters (Mark Zuckerberg, Cheryl Sandberg and others) come out and transparency addressed this issue, rather than hiding behind spurious and unethical practices that bizarrely appeared to invite even more regulatory intrigue into Facebook’s practices and only served to highlight Facebook’s own privacy issues, then the public and business community would have been privy to an intriguing and highly valuable conversation about the role of online privacy and content sharing.

    Alas, this wasn’t the case, and we are left with an ugly and hamfisted incident in which PR’s reputation and ethics are once again called into question.

    Smear campaigns and deceptive practices, such as not disclosing who you are representing or a client's intentions, are unethical and only serve to erode the public and media's trust in PR and diminish our value to the business community.

    Thankfully, many PR professionals recognize this and have swiftly repudiated B-M’s tactics, as well as that of Facebook asking and paying for such work. Equally positive is that the majority of PR professionals are ethical and have the public’s best interests in mind.

    Keith Trivitt
    Associate Director of Public Relations
    Public Relations Society of America

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

Have your say

Mandatory
Mandatory
Mandatory
Mandatory

Related images

Job of the Week

Top Jobs

social+media Facebook Twitter LinkedIn
knowledge+bank