Disclosure Is Not Enough

Photo Courtesy: Mikael Altemark

Paul just posted an open question concerning a potential ethics code violation at the WOMMA blog.

I think the active parties perceived their actions to sufficiently disclose their relationship and intention of spreading messages on behalf of their client, Motorola. Listening to the growth and adoption of the social media mindset within the world of PR and marketing, I actually think astroturfing was the furthest objective from their minds.

However, there is a very traditional mentality at work here wherein agencies see the internet as a place to put or publish messages for a brand.

There are too many definitions for authenticity when it comes to online participation, and too many inauthentic "hits" / one-off messages that completely miss the value of participatory consumer marketing.

From a blogger's perspective:

It's not enough to disclose your affiliation when you are advertising in our comment boxes.

Take the time to get to know us.

This means introduce yourself, then contribute.

If we like you, we'll embrace your message (And, it will be a lot more effective if it comes from our voices instead of yours.)

Your job is not to get the message out there - it's to show us that you care enough about the community for us to get the message out for you.

For a DWOM practitioner

Make the message relevant, personal, and 'invited.'

Bloggers still want your participation!

Re-align your tactics with your program goals in such a way that you are building marketers of bloggers - as opposed to marketing to bloggers

Be visibly authentic.

How else can we help drive sustainable word of mouth marketing best practices to not just abide by a code of ethics such as the ones put forth by WOMMA, but to actively seek relevance and authenticity within the communities they hope to foster long-term brand advocacy and earn trust?