Microsoft paid for a group of bloggers to attend its Mobius 2002 product briefings this weekend. This raises a serious ethical question. I am not implying it is necessarily unethical for a blogger to accept a trip to Microsoft, just that it requires some thinking about the way companies might manipulate the blogger to get favorable coverage. Before this gets confrontational, I am not saying that bloggers are rank amateurs and that you should pay attention only to professional journalists, who, as a general rule, would not accept a trip at the expense of a company they were covering.
Mobius 2002 is a kind of product promotional event that Microsoft has held for years. These things usually fill up with a mix of hardened tech editors, industry analysts and a few fans of technology. Bill Gates or Steve Ballmer appear, say a few words, stay around for a few questions in the hall and then welcome key editors into their offices for "intimate" discussion. The rest of the crowd hears hours of product briefings, which are a combination of real technical demos and information, some smoke and mirrors, and a whole lot of spin. Microsoft is by no means the only company that does this kind of event and is not evil because it does so -- building buzz about products is one of the main tasks a company faces in the tech industry.
Journalists are trained to be outsiders, even when they are getting inside. At the point that they start to interact as partners in the process of marketing (for good or ill, in that the express opinions rather than simply report the technical facts), they are not journalists anymore. They've either graduated to PR, to writing columns in which they express explicit opinions, they are activists, and they might start a newsletter. But, they don't take the company's money, its largesse in the form of hotel or airline expenses or otherwise while working as a journalist. The idea, albeit imperfectly realized in practice, is that there is as little conflict of interest as possible. Good columnists don't take expenses for these trips, either. I have never taken a paid trip, except to give a speech once, for the U.S. State Department to address the Malaysian Securities Commission, at a time I was writing two columns about investing. I've turned down speaking fees from companies many times, but do speak at companies occasionally.
Are bloggers ready for and aware of the potential influence of the gift of a trip, the thrill of hanging with the inventors of the technology they care about, the recurring calls they'll receive after the trip to reinforce the marketing messaging they were exposed to in Redmond? I don't know, but both bloggers and their readers should think about this.
The publishing companies that employ journalists spend a lot of money to cover their journalists' expenses to cover stories without monetary influence by the subject of the stories. In the tech trade press they also take a lot of money from the companies that are covered, but I have never in more than 15 years writing for the trades been asked to modify a story to avoid offending an advertiser.
Would you be comfortable if you knew that your favorite warblogger were receiving invitations to sleep in the Lincoln Bedroom at the White House? Would you be comfortable if your favorite peaceblogger were receiving free computers and free passes to the Iraqi presidential harem of sexual athletes from Saddam Hussein? Bet you would take their perspective differently -- not better or worse, objective or not, but differently. And it is that change I am asking you to consider here. There are people at every company paid to create favorable coverage of the company -- bloggers are an emerging and ripe target for these people.
Money is a powerful influence. So, I looked at each the blogger sites Doc Searls said was represented at Mobius to see if they disclosed their expense-paid trip and what kind of superlatives they used to describe the products they saw.
The posting that got me started with this was at Gizmodo, a "weblog dedicated to everything related to gadgets, gizmos, and cutting-edge consumer electronics." They wrote: Full Disclosure: Bizarre as it sounds, Microsoft actually thinks enough of weblogs in general, and this weblog in particular, to have sprung for my airfare and hotel. Don't worry, I'll still tell you whether or not their new gadgets are any good.
The phrase "don't worry" worries me, because it is not bizarre that Microsoft should try to influence a key influencer in the gadget market. The three postings at Gizmodo about the event this weekend include a tepid comment about one product, the Smart Display, and a description of a "rollercoaster ride of new gadgets" that will be covered in text later. That's quite a superlative, one I would have edited out if presented the story by a reporter, because it sounds like an endorsement of the event. Rollercoasters are fun, so the products are fun.
Here's what I found at other sites Doc mentioned that discuss Microsoft in the past couple days. Granted, these site may not have been given airline tickets and hotel accommodations, but based on the statement from Gizmodo, as a critical reader we have to assume they were:
PDAntic.com said it was attending the event, raved about the products it was excited about seeing and made no disclosure that Microsoft was paying the freight.
InfoSync, a news site, does not mention the Mobius conference in any postings in the last few days, but does report on two Microsoft-related items in its blog.
Writing On Your Palm, a blog, is positively ecstatic about its experience at Mobius: "Tablet PC freakin' rocks. To quote Will Smith in 'ID4', 'I have GOT to get me one of these!'" There is no disclosure about expenses being covered.
PocketPC Thoughts, a blog and product information site, is very positive in a posting that talks about the information being discussed at Mobius without mentioning the event or any disclosures about expenses. "I'm most excited about the Windows Media Player 8.5 release - previously code-named 'Salsa,'" Jason Dunn writes, "the support for 9 Series Windows Media comes in advance of the 9 Series tools being finalized."
So, four out of these five sites that apparently received airfare and hotel expenses did not discloses this conflict or, in order to distinguish themselves from those who did take the free trip, state that they did not receive any value from Microsoft.
Blog-reading is a kind of guided tour of someone's perceptions, so we need to understand the reasons to ask these questions and the answers. Readers do need to think about this issue. Bloggers need to discuss it. What are the standards of conduct? What do readers need to know in order to judge the sources they are reading or relying on for guidance in reading?
I'm thinking about it, too, because I am looking at how to bring sponsors or other revenue into this blog. For years now I have joked about being "Conflict Boy," not because I took trips at the expense of the companies I wrote about, but because in some cases since I became a consultant I have worked for or been on the board of directors of the companies or their competitors about which I am writing.
I joke about being Conflict Boy, because I am so used to disclosing my conflicts of interest and even changing the hat I am wearing in a meeting, going from columnist/analyst to business guy and saying, "Look, I know this is strange, but let's talk about a business deal after we're done talking about your strategy."
I am often critical of companies with which I do business or with which I am currently negotiating on behalf of a client. Moreover, I often compliment my clients' competitors for the things they do right. Sometimes I criticize idiotic statements about my clients, as I did here, when a reporter suggested another company had introduced totally unique service that my client, Audible, had delivered for years.
I know everyone's secrets and don't tell them; I am Conflict Boy I always disclose. I've made it a practice, deeper than a religion it is part of my very soul to be honest about those conflicts. But, let me tell you, it does take a lot of conviction to stay the course and I have been sorely tempted to fudge. So far, though, I have not. I think if I did, I'd write about it.
Oddly, if memory serves, I said something at Jerry Michalski's Retreat! Conference in 1996 about being Conflict Boy and Chris Locke, who was sitting right in front of me, said, "Oh yeah, well, I'm RageBoy." Anyway, that was the conference where he got the name and I probably remember my own role with an inflated perspective. Feel free to correct me if you were there.
You can see, though, how a blogger in the thrall of the Redmond PR horde (or any other corporate PR machine -- AT&T used to do this really well, for example) would be tempted to see the fact that a product manager for PocketPC took them aside and explained something or, amazingly to the dumbfounded blogger, leaked product information -- a scoop! Will they think critically about what is being said to them or fall into the trap of enthusiasm? Will they write their honest opinion, that the product manager's new release is junk if it will cost them the free trip to Mobius next year?
Bloggers rejoice about the new paradigm in information dissemination that they represent. Well, here's a hard question for them to address seriously before dismissing the practitioners of journalism.
Posted by Mitch Ratcliffe at October 12, 2002 08:45 PM | TrackBack