<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: How Organizations can Get Human  and Credible with Blogs, Podcasts, and Journalism (audio)</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.contentious.com/2005/01/18/how-organizations-can-get-human-and-credible-with-blogs-podcasts-and-journalism-audio/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.contentious.com/2005/01/18/how-organizations-can-get-human-and-credible-with-blogs-podcasts-and-journalism-audio/</link>
	<description>Amy Gahran's news and musings on how we communicate in the online age.</description>
	<pubDate>Fri, 09 Jan 2009 22:40:18 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Amy Gahran</title>
		<link>http://www.contentious.com/2005/01/18/how-organizations-can-get-human-and-credible-with-blogs-podcasts-and-journalism-audio/comment-page-1/#comment-10251</link>
		<dc:creator>Amy Gahran</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 28 Jan 2005 01:04:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-10251</guid>
		<description>Dave wrote: &lt;i&gt;"I fear the command and control structure is so firmly entrenched in corporate minds that very few will risk not having everyone singing from the same hymnal."&lt;/i&gt;

Precisely -- and that's fine. The organizations which do realize the advantage that acting human offers in the emerging media landscape are going to win.

- Amy Gahran</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Dave wrote: <i>&#8220;I fear the command and control structure is so firmly entrenched in corporate minds that very few will risk not having everyone singing from the same hymnal.&#8221;</i></p>
<p>Precisely &#8212; and that&#8217;s fine. The organizations which do realize the advantage that acting human offers in the emerging media landscape are going to win.</p>
<p>- Amy Gahran</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dave Johnson</title>
		<link>http://www.contentious.com/2005/01/18/how-organizations-can-get-human-and-credible-with-blogs-podcasts-and-journalism-audio/comment-page-1/#comment-10049</link>
		<dc:creator>Dave Johnson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 25 Jan 2005 23:19:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-10049</guid>
		<description>My god, Amy, are you actually proposing in item 2 that corporations shall set their people free to say whatever the hell is on their minds? What a godsend to reporters that would be. But I fear the command and control structure is so firmly entrenched in corporate minds that very few will risk not having everyone singing from the same hymnal. Even with the tech now available, perhaps in reaction to it, I see corporate communications becoming more scripted. Try calling up a corporate type for an off-the-cuff, on the spot interview. Spontaneity is out, Amy. Packaging and brands and socially responsible imagery is in. More and more I have to schedule interviews in advance. "Can you send me your questions first?" Then there's more pressure than in the loose old days to have quotes read back to sources, "Can I see the story before print", etc. Seems everyone's been burned by the media, or so I'm told. Then there's the fear that some employee will spout something to trigger an investigation or a drop in the stock, god forbid. And there's also a closer, cozier relationship between reporters and sources and publications and advertisers which seems to have resulted in I'll watch your back, you watch mine. All this weighs against the decentralization and democratization of corporate-speak. Attached is a column I wrote on this corporate paranoid urge to control everything. Scary, I had readers responding, hmmm, not a bad idea.
Cheers,
Dave Johnson..</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>My god, Amy, are you actually proposing in item 2 that corporations shall set their people free to say whatever the hell is on their minds? What a godsend to reporters that would be. But I fear the command and control structure is so firmly entrenched in corporate minds that very few will risk not having everyone singing from the same hymnal. Even with the tech now available, perhaps in reaction to it, I see corporate communications becoming more scripted. Try calling up a corporate type for an off-the-cuff, on the spot interview. Spontaneity is out, Amy. Packaging and brands and socially responsible imagery is in. More and more I have to schedule interviews in advance. &#8220;Can you send me your questions first?&#8221; Then there&#8217;s more pressure than in the loose old days to have quotes read back to sources, &#8220;Can I see the story before print&#8221;, etc. Seems everyone&#8217;s been burned by the media, or so I&#8217;m told. Then there&#8217;s the fear that some employee will spout something to trigger an investigation or a drop in the stock, god forbid. And there&#8217;s also a closer, cozier relationship between reporters and sources and publications and advertisers which seems to have resulted in I&#8217;ll watch your back, you watch mine. All this weighs against the decentralization and democratization of corporate-speak. Attached is a column I wrote on this corporate paranoid urge to control everything. Scary, I had readers responding, hmmm, not a bad idea.<br />
Cheers,<br />
Dave Johnson..</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
