Monday, October 8, 2007

Another Version of Blogola

The Wall Street Journal uncovered another form of blogola in this weekend's paper -- restaurants handing out free meals in return for hoped-for good coverage from food bloggers and posters on consumer-oriented sites like Yelp.

An excerpt:

Dine, a contemporary American restaurant in Chicago, has been open for less than two years. But on one popular Web site, it is already rated half a star shy of Charlie Trotter's.


How did Dine garner such favorable reviews? One thing that probably didn't hurt: It fed many of the reviewers free. Last August, Dine spent about $1,500 on an event for members of Yelp, a Web site where consumers post reviews and rate restaurants. The nearly 100 members were treated to an open bar, duck roulade appetizers and red velvet cupcakes for dessert. As a bonus, they all received certificates for discounts on subsequent meals. The result: a torrent of favorable reviews on Yelp. Most reviewers mentioned that they attended a Yelp event, though few highlighted that the food and drink was free.



"I think if I was picking up the tab I wouldn't enjoy it as much," says Leigh Kelsey, a 28-year-old Chicago file clerk at a law firm who attended the event and posted positive comments on Yelp. A spokeswoman for Dine says attendees were not required to write reviews of any nature, positive or negative.

As online food sites become increasingly influential in the restaurant business, chefs and owners are plying bloggers with free meals to get good write-ups. Some are also posting favorable reviews about themselves on popular Web sites or becoming Internet scribes.



I think it's safe to say at this point that the train has left the station on this subject. We will be seeing lots more versions of blogola, and fewer and fewer reasons why PR has to adhere to old media's strict standards.


This is not de facto a bad thing. PR's job is to influence the media. The media is changing, so PR has little choice but to change with it. Over time, media consumers will have to decide how important it is for their chosen media to aspire to a certain level of ethical behavior in gathering and reporting information. If media consumers don't care about lax ethics, in other words, if media companies can make money without adhering to what had been thought of as appropriate ethical standards, then that is where we will end up, and PR will have to adapt. Simple as that.

1 comment:

  1. I agree. Money certainly does not equal bad. What really matters is the perception of the "outlet" doing the "reporting" and, by extension, the perception of the people, places and things that outlet covers.

    Even in situations where the ethics might be less black and white and lot more gray, disclosure of things like money trading hands or other special consideration is usually all it takes to clear the air. I agree, Jon. This is not automatically a bad thing.

    ReplyDelete