<?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"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Disney&#8217;s Duncan Wardle and the Future of Public Relations</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.mediarelationsblog.com/134/duncan-wardle-future-pr/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.mediarelationsblog.com/134/duncan-wardle-future-pr/</link>
	<description>Dedicated to the world of media, public relations and marketing from Misukanis &#38; Odden Public Relations.</description>
	<pubDate>Thu, 24 Jul 2008 00:43:00 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Susan Gosselin</title>
		<link>http://www.mediarelationsblog.com/134/duncan-wardle-future-pr/#comment-11562</link>
		<dc:creator>Susan Gosselin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 11 Apr 2008 14:20:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mediarelationsblog.com/134/duncan-wardle-future-pr/#comment-11562</guid>
		<description>There are two reasons to cheer this presentation:  first, that Disney showcased such an effective and relevant social media case study; and second, that they realize the value of having public relations spearhead this effort. (OK, so I have a bias in this area.)

But I have to say, I completely disagree with his "news is dead" hypothesis.  If anything, people are consuming more news from more sources than ever before.  Most people I know are getting their news from some sort of traditional source first, even if it's an online version of a traditional news source.  Then they search for analysis, blogs and networks where they can debate the meaning of the news around the campfire.  Even those who get their news from a blogger first often find themselves clicking back to the original coverage first.

You know, I find this pattern emerging over and over every time a new communication platform comes to the fore.

It goes something like this:

Wow!  Look at this technology!  You know what this means... the old way of doing things is deader than dead!  What will this mean to all those poor old traditional companies?  Sell your stock now!  Look for the buyouts!

Look at this new technology! Any company not trying it has just got their head in the sand!

But then a curious thing happens. Some companies try it and excel.  Others try it and wonder why the "if I build it they will come" philosophy didn't work.  The medium suffers from an overexposure effect.  It gets tired, a little out of fashion, and people start to realize its limitations.

Aren't we all a little smarter than this?  No matter what the technology, people want news. They want accurate, relevant news targeted to their situation.  In today's environment, they want that in whatever format makes it easiest for them to consume, given their lifestyle. When they have the time, they want to belong to networks with people who are intelligent enough to offer real insight, and where they can learn more about that news, particularly news in their trade, together.

Companies are expected to be transparent.  The ones that are the most interesting or who have the most entertainment value, like Disney, can coax their customers into any number of dialogs and participatory campaigns.  But beware...if every company that sells a product tries Disney's strategy, America's eyeballs can only read so much.

So let's get real here. It's the information age.  People need more news than ever before.  They are expected to do more with less, in less time. The quality of coverage needs to keep going up. But we, in the p.r. and the news business, need to find ways to make that news more portable, scalable and interactive if we want to make the cut.

The news isn't dead.  It's just being reincarnated.

--Susan Gosselin,
Louisville, KY

People want</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>There are two reasons to cheer this presentation:  first, that Disney showcased such an effective and relevant social media case study; and second, that they realize the value of having public relations spearhead this effort. (OK, so I have a bias in this area.)</p>
<p>But I have to say, I completely disagree with his &#8220;news is dead&#8221; hypothesis.  If anything, people are consuming more news from more sources than ever before.  Most people I know are getting their news from some sort of traditional source first, even if it&#8217;s an online version of a traditional news source.  Then they search for analysis, blogs and networks where they can debate the meaning of the news around the campfire.  Even those who get their news from a blogger first often find themselves clicking back to the original coverage first.</p>
<p>You know, I find this pattern emerging over and over every time a new communication platform comes to the fore.</p>
<p>It goes something like this:</p>
<p>Wow!  Look at this technology!  You know what this means&#8230; the old way of doing things is deader than dead!  What will this mean to all those poor old traditional companies?  Sell your stock now!  Look for the buyouts!</p>
<p>Look at this new technology! Any company not trying it has just got their head in the sand!</p>
<p>But then a curious thing happens. Some companies try it and excel.  Others try it and wonder why the &#8220;if I build it they will come&#8221; philosophy didn&#8217;t work.  The medium suffers from an overexposure effect.  It gets tired, a little out of fashion, and people start to realize its limitations.</p>
<p>Aren&#8217;t we all a little smarter than this?  No matter what the technology, people want news. They want accurate, relevant news targeted to their situation.  In today&#8217;s environment, they want that in whatever format makes it easiest for them to consume, given their lifestyle. When they have the time, they want to belong to networks with people who are intelligent enough to offer real insight, and where they can learn more about that news, particularly news in their trade, together.</p>
<p>Companies are expected to be transparent.  The ones that are the most interesting or who have the most entertainment value, like Disney, can coax their customers into any number of dialogs and participatory campaigns.  But beware&#8230;if every company that sells a product tries Disney&#8217;s strategy, America&#8217;s eyeballs can only read so much.</p>
<p>So let&#8217;s get real here. It&#8217;s the information age.  People need more news than ever before.  They are expected to do more with less, in less time. The quality of coverage needs to keep going up. But we, in the p.r. and the news business, need to find ways to make that news more portable, scalable and interactive if we want to make the cut.</p>
<p>The news isn&#8217;t dead.  It&#8217;s just being reincarnated.</p>
<p>&#8211;Susan Gosselin,<br />
Louisville, KY</p>
<p>People want</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
