Are Private Conversations History?

October 29th, 2006 |

Should all conversations be on the record and fair game for blogging? Over the weekend, several bloggers, in light of a posting from Digitas’ Greg Verdino, asked why the recent Nielsen BuzzMetrics client-only "CGM Summit" wasn’t open to public blogging. [Disclosures: 1) Nielsen BuzzMetrics is my employer, 2) Digitas has done work with Nielsen BuzzMetrics, 3) I was a key architect of the CGM Summit in question and 4) I gratefully attended three weeks ago a wonderful Digitas/Logic+Emotion public presentation on blogging.]

The answer is simple: our paying clients preferred that format, and this was their conference. The agenda, topics, and key questions all flowed from their input - even their desire to tackle issues privately. Importantly, unlike many public media conferences, which seek awareness and ticket sales, this was a no-charge, no-frills gathering of 100 representatives from client organizations who have invested significant time and resources in Nielsen BuzzMetrics services. This was not an event put on for bloggers, but a client user-group meeting, something thousands of companies hold in private everyday. In the end, we achieved deep and stimulating conversation, led primarily by the clients themselves, and putting their interests first was the right thing to do.

We’ll continue to seek our clients’ input in future client-only events to see if a more fully exposed, "on-the-record" forum makes sense. We want to get it right, and welcome public feedback as well. At the same time, we must honor obligations to confidentiality around client case studies, client information and client wishes.

Beyond our case, I hope we can leverage this opportunity to address an extremely important issue. I’m not talking about “blogging conferences” because that’s really just a red herring; the core issue is when conversations should be on the record and when they shouldn’t. There definitely are powerful arguments and benefits for openness and full exposure, but I’m not sure extremes – one way or the other – are feasible or responsible. And our case demonstrated there are many people on both sides. As my colleague Matt Hurst underscored, “This is a matter of mutual respect and understanding the value of intimacy in discussion,” and I happen to agree. There also are serious legal implications and social expectations.

Again, we welcome comments and suggestions on our specific situation and beyond. We want to get it right, as Jonathan Carson, our CEO at Nielsen BuzzMetrics, underscored on his official company blog (and encouraged me to do so here on my personal space here).

Viewing 7 Comments

David Armano 2 years ago 1 point
Please login to rate.

Do you already have an account? Log in and claim this comment.

Max,

That's a pretty fair answer to a fair question. I guess that's the bigger point I was trying to make by referencing Greg's post. I thought he raised a valid point about a cgm conference not allowing cgm.

I agree with you about avoiding extremes, as extreme positions are certainly not the answer. I would be curious to see how your clients feel about future events. But I think you did a great thing here by addressing the question head and providing your rationale (as well as the disclosures)

reply edit reblog flag record video comment

http://darmano.typepad.com

David Armano 2 years ago 1 point
Please login to rate.

Do you already have an account? Log in and claim this comment.

Max,

That's a pretty fair answer to a fair question. I guess that's the bigger point I was trying to make by referencing Greg's post. I thought he raised a valid point about a cgm conference not allowing cgm.

I agree with you about avoiding extremes, as extreme positions are certainly not the answer. I would be curious to see how your clients feel about future events. But I think you did a great thing here by addressing the question head and providing your rationale (as well as the disclosures)

reply edit reblog flag record video comment

http://darmano.typepad.com

Noah Brier 2 years ago 1 point
Please login to rate.

Do you already have an account? Log in and claim this comment.

Max, I hope you'll use this as an example for your clients on how to handle a situation like this. Greg and David had a valid question/criticism and you provided a very logical and thoughtful response (as I had no doubt you would).

reply edit reblog flag record video comment

http://www.noahbrier.com

Greg Verdino 2 years ago 1 point
Please login to rate.

Do you already have an account? Log in and claim this comment.

Max - Thanks for your thoughtful response. Let me begin by stating that my post reflected my personal opinion (and not the official stance of my employer), but that even after participating as a BuzzMetrics client (on behalf of my employer) I didn't hear much (outside of some of the conversation in the breakout sessions) that struck me as overtly proprietary. The event was wonderful, to be sure, and I enjoyed participating. You'll note that I did in fact respect BuzzMetrics' wishes and did not blog about the content. Nonetheless, even as a client I think that at least some of the content could have been reported without violating confidentiality, causing discomfort or adversely impacting Nielsen, its customers or the quality of the event. There is a difference between establishing a blanket no blog policy and distinguishing between on-the-record and off-the-record statements.

Having said this, I stand by my post which, after all, simply raised a question.

On a separate but related note, I want to be clear that the Digitas/Logic+Emotion event was actually an internal Digitas employee event, to which we invited a select group of marketing bloggers and MSM reporters. Like your CGM event, this was not a "public" event, yet we certainly did welcome the outside opinions, coverage and interest. And, frankly, we are glad we did - the coverage by you and others was fantastic. In the end, I'm not sure that the nature of this event was all that different from the nature of yours...

reply edit reblog flag record video comment

http://gregverdino.typepad.com

Greg Verdino 2 years ago 1 point
Please login to rate.

Do you already have an account? Log in and claim this comment.

Max - Thanks for your thoughtful response. Let me begin by stating that my post reflected my personal opinion (and not the official stance of my employer), but that even after participating as a BuzzMetrics client (on behalf of my employer) I didn't hear much (outside of some of the conversation in the breakout sessions) that struck me as overtly proprietary. The event was wonderful, to be sure, and I enjoyed participating. You'll note that I did in fact respect BuzzMetrics' wishes and did not blog about the content. Nonetheless, even as a client I think that at least some of the content could have been reported without violating confidentiality, causing discomfort or adversely impacting Nielsen, its customers or the quality of the event. There is a difference between establishing a blanket no blog policy and distinguishing between on-the-record and off-the-record statements.

Having said this, I stand by my post which, after all, simply raised a question.

On a separate but related note, I want to be clear that the Digitas/Logic+Emotion event was actually an internal Digitas employee event, to which we invited a select group of marketing bloggers and MSM reporters. Like your CGM event, this was not a "public" event, yet we certainly did welcome the outside opinions, coverage and interest. And, frankly, we are glad we did - the coverage by you and others was fantastic. In the end, I'm not sure that the nature of this event was all that different from the nature of yours...

reply edit reblog flag record video comment

http://gregverdino.typepad.com

Greg Verdino 2 years ago 1 point
Please login to rate.

Do you already have an account? Log in and claim this comment.

Max - Thanks for your thoughtful response. Let me begin by stating that my post reflected my personal opinion (and not the official stance of my employer), but that even after participating as a BuzzMetrics client (on behalf of my employer) I didn't hear much (outside of some of the conversation in the breakout sessions) that struck me as overtly proprietary. The event was wonderful, to be sure, and I enjoyed participating. You'll note that I did in fact respect BuzzMetrics' wishes and did not blog about the content. Nonetheless, even as a client I think that at least some of the content could have been reported without violating confidentiality, causing discomfort or adversely impacting Nielsen, its customers or the quality of the event. There is a difference between establishing a blanket no blog policy and distinguishing between on-the-record and off-the-record statements.

Having said this, I stand by my post which, after all, simply raised a question.

On a separate but related note, I want to be clear that the Digitas/Logic+Emotion event was actually an internal Digitas employee event, to which we invited a select group of marketing bloggers and MSM reporters. Like your CGM event, this was not a "public" event, yet we certainly did welcome the outside opinions, coverage and interest. And, frankly, we are glad we did - the coverage by you and others was fantastic. In the end, I'm not sure that the nature of this event was all that different from the nature of yours...

reply edit reblog flag record video comment

http://gregverdino.typepad.com

Joseph Hunkins 2 years ago 1 point
Please login to rate.

Do you already have an account? Log in and claim this comment.

Max this is a thoughtful argument and correctly separates this case from normal conference blogging as I failed to do in my critical post.
However I remain skeptical of any anti-blogging policy since it defies a new open standard that suggests blogging keeps the online world humming along nicely. This appears to be too close to asserting that it's OK to profit from online communities and activities with no obligation to share insights with that same community"

reply edit reblog flag record video comment

http://joeduck.wordpress.com