Graduation is Friday! I have officially entered freakout mode.
Anyway, I am now a Tweeter. Check me out on Twitter: http://twitter.com/alexrelates
Also, research is going well. 117 responses so far. Stand by for end-of-the-year wrap-up posts.
Sunday, April 25, 2010
Saturday, March 20, 2010
Update (and take my survey!)
Ah! Long time, no blog. I'd been caught up in school, work and other stuff, and before I knew it, it was March!
Anyway, I wanted to give a quick update on my research project for CSR-pedia. CSR-pedia is the project of my professor, Dr. Mary Ann Ferguson, who has created a wiki to compile information about corporate social responsibility programs. Corporate social responsibility (CSR) is a built-in function of corporations dealing with their adherence to legal, ethical, and cultural standards. Dr. Ferguson has been a great help to me throughout the development of this survey, which will show us more about the information consumption habits of those interested in corporate social responsibility.
My survey attempts to document the way online CSR communities share and consume information about CSR, helping to pinpoint the types of CSR program information these communities want most, and in what type of media format they prefer to receive it. The goal is to build a foundation of information about CSR with which we can identify ways to improve CSR-pedia (or other CSR-focused Web sites).
If you'd like to take the survey, click here, or if you'd like a copy of the results, send an e-mail to csrsurvey dot wise at gmail dot com. I hope to have the results compiled and analyzed by May.
Anyway, I wanted to give a quick update on my research project for CSR-pedia. CSR-pedia is the project of my professor, Dr. Mary Ann Ferguson, who has created a wiki to compile information about corporate social responsibility programs. Corporate social responsibility (CSR) is a built-in function of corporations dealing with their adherence to legal, ethical, and cultural standards. Dr. Ferguson has been a great help to me throughout the development of this survey, which will show us more about the information consumption habits of those interested in corporate social responsibility.
My survey attempts to document the way online CSR communities share and consume information about CSR, helping to pinpoint the types of CSR program information these communities want most, and in what type of media format they prefer to receive it. The goal is to build a foundation of information about CSR with which we can identify ways to improve CSR-pedia (or other CSR-focused Web sites).
If you'd like to take the survey, click here, or if you'd like a copy of the results, send an e-mail to csrsurvey dot wise at gmail dot com. I hope to have the results compiled and analyzed by May.
Thursday, June 18, 2009
Does PR deserve to be an academic discipline?
As a Public Relations undergraduate, I have to defend my unfinished degree about as often as I tell people I’m a PR major. Acquaintances struggling through organic chemistry or Arabic language courses might have questions like “Isn’t that what the guy in Thank You For Smoking does?” or “What do you do with all your free time?” or “Does it hurt to be inferior?”
I’m exaggerating, of course, and no one means to offend when asking questions about Public Relations, but I do sense that the hard sciences and even the humanities look down on us media majors. And why should Public Relations majors need to argue for academic legitimacy? It seems unfair. I go to college. I work hard. What’s the deal?
Perhaps the most obvious reason is that Public Relations is an academic discipline in its infancy. Edward Bernays, often called the father of modern Public Relations, taught the first course in Public Relations at New York University in 1923. Faced with respected fields like philosophy and mathematics that have been around for millennia, Public Relations really is the new kid on the block – the new kid who is kinda short and trying really hard to make friends. But even considering the relative newness of the discipline, Public Relations is a rapidly expanding research area and branch of learning – we should be proud of this.
Another reason for the disrespect from my hard science peers might be that Public Relations is a science predicated on fields like communication theory, sociology and psychology, which are already seen as nebulous and esoteric. Considering the criticisms already directed at our theoretical foundations, Public Relations researchers must work that much harder to show causal relationships grounded in hard data. As an undergraduate unburdened by the research responsibilities of graduate students and professors in the college, that’s easy for me to say, but I’ll say it anyway. I’m getting involved in research this year in the College of Journalism and Communications at the University of Florida and I hope I’ll be able to update here about my work there.
But hey, despite all the hate I may get from friends in other colleges, I really love my major for one reason: its potential for real-world applications. If you’re a PR major, this is the #1 reason why you should be proud of your degree. Shout it from the rooftops! Public Relations needs lovin’ too!
I’m exaggerating, of course, and no one means to offend when asking questions about Public Relations, but I do sense that the hard sciences and even the humanities look down on us media majors. And why should Public Relations majors need to argue for academic legitimacy? It seems unfair. I go to college. I work hard. What’s the deal?
Perhaps the most obvious reason is that Public Relations is an academic discipline in its infancy. Edward Bernays, often called the father of modern Public Relations, taught the first course in Public Relations at New York University in 1923. Faced with respected fields like philosophy and mathematics that have been around for millennia, Public Relations really is the new kid on the block – the new kid who is kinda short and trying really hard to make friends. But even considering the relative newness of the discipline, Public Relations is a rapidly expanding research area and branch of learning – we should be proud of this.
Another reason for the disrespect from my hard science peers might be that Public Relations is a science predicated on fields like communication theory, sociology and psychology, which are already seen as nebulous and esoteric. Considering the criticisms already directed at our theoretical foundations, Public Relations researchers must work that much harder to show causal relationships grounded in hard data. As an undergraduate unburdened by the research responsibilities of graduate students and professors in the college, that’s easy for me to say, but I’ll say it anyway. I’m getting involved in research this year in the College of Journalism and Communications at the University of Florida and I hope I’ll be able to update here about my work there.
But hey, despite all the hate I may get from friends in other colleges, I really love my major for one reason: its potential for real-world applications. If you’re a PR major, this is the #1 reason why you should be proud of your degree. Shout it from the rooftops! Public Relations needs lovin’ too!
Thursday, June 4, 2009
China practices crisis communications 20 years too late, and poorly
Assuming these men blocking a view of Tiananmen Square with umbrellas are doing so at the behest of the Chinese government, their actions represent one of the worst ways to deal with the media. (Background: If you weren't aware, today, June 4th, is the 20th anniversary of the Tiananmen Square massacre).
Because of the Chinese government's inane policy, the BBC has downright creepy footage from a country that is either:
1. evidently embarrassed of its own history and expressing this sentiment through policy,
2. so grossly incompetent that it actually believes umbrellas will prevent the media from filming, or
3. so grossly incompetent that it actually believes umbrellas will hide the story from the public eye a full 20 years after the Tiananmen Square incident occurred.
So, in trying to cover up its violent, authoritarian history, China looks more Orwellian than ever. How can Chinese officials justify this policy? Where are the apologies? If China expects to be taken seriously on the world stage (which it does), policies like the one shown in the video must end.
Because of the Chinese government's inane policy, the BBC has downright creepy footage from a country that is either:
1. evidently embarrassed of its own history and expressing this sentiment through policy,
2. so grossly incompetent that it actually believes umbrellas will prevent the media from filming, or
3. so grossly incompetent that it actually believes umbrellas will hide the story from the public eye a full 20 years after the Tiananmen Square incident occurred.
So, in trying to cover up its violent, authoritarian history, China looks more Orwellian than ever. How can Chinese officials justify this policy? Where are the apologies? If China expects to be taken seriously on the world stage (which it does), policies like the one shown in the video must end.
Thursday, April 2, 2009
What the internet means for...everything.
Haha, wow, my old blog! Just how I remember it. Let me dust off the post button reeeal quick. Yup, still works.
Okay, so I've been thinking lately about the Internet, and because I consider myself a big picture person (I like to consider systems as a whole), I've been thinking about the big picture of the Internet. And, ladies and gentlemen, it's a mess.
The Internet is a mess. Virtually every aspect of the Internet is poorly understood and, therefore, poorly managed - the way we access it , regulate it, pay for it, view it, make money on it, control identity with it, communicate through it. Maybe I'm being melodramatic, but can you predict the outcome of any one of these problems we're facing right now? I know I can't. But sure, we're starting to figure out what works and what doesn't.
So what? Well, so a lot of things. For example, as an individual, using the Internet means walking in a reputation minefield. You know that scene in Grease where the news of Rizzo's unexpected pregnancy beats her back from the bathroom? Well, it's like that, except worse. My generation often treats the Internet like its own private social forum, but in reality the information is transparent and easy to share. Organizations have as much (if not more) to worry about than individuals; "isolated incidents" that once flew under the radar of big media can now blow up faster than alka-seltzer in a seagull.
And if you're not messing up your reputation online, your organization is probably, at best, basking in the mediocrity of its lifeless Web page. Which is fine. But it's no way to drive traffic, command attention or make money.
How can you use the Internet to its full potential?
1. Consider your goals as an organization. Could an organzational Web site or involvement in social media help you achieve those goals?
2. Consider your audience. What are they like?
3. Consider the value of your content. If you're a corporation, people aren't going to visit your page to view your canned advertorial content. There'd better be something to worthwhile to your readers - attention is difficult to keep.
4. Update! Content must timely or no one will care.
Later I'll talk more about how you can engage the online audience. In the meantime, to my readers (if there are any of you) - how has the Internet affected the way you consume media?
Okay, so I've been thinking lately about the Internet, and because I consider myself a big picture person (I like to consider systems as a whole), I've been thinking about the big picture of the Internet. And, ladies and gentlemen, it's a mess.
The Internet is a mess. Virtually every aspect of the Internet is poorly understood and, therefore, poorly managed - the way we access it , regulate it, pay for it, view it, make money on it, control identity with it, communicate through it. Maybe I'm being melodramatic, but can you predict the outcome of any one of these problems we're facing right now? I know I can't. But sure, we're starting to figure out what works and what doesn't.
So what? Well, so a lot of things. For example, as an individual, using the Internet means walking in a reputation minefield. You know that scene in Grease where the news of Rizzo's unexpected pregnancy beats her back from the bathroom? Well, it's like that, except worse. My generation often treats the Internet like its own private social forum, but in reality the information is transparent and easy to share. Organizations have as much (if not more) to worry about than individuals; "isolated incidents" that once flew under the radar of big media can now blow up faster than alka-seltzer in a seagull.
And if you're not messing up your reputation online, your organization is probably, at best, basking in the mediocrity of its lifeless Web page. Which is fine. But it's no way to drive traffic, command attention or make money.
How can you use the Internet to its full potential?
1. Consider your goals as an organization. Could an organzational Web site or involvement in social media help you achieve those goals?
2. Consider your audience. What are they like?
3. Consider the value of your content. If you're a corporation, people aren't going to visit your page to view your canned advertorial content. There'd better be something to worthwhile to your readers - attention is difficult to keep.
4. Update! Content must timely or no one will care.
Later I'll talk more about how you can engage the online audience. In the meantime, to my readers (if there are any of you) - how has the Internet affected the way you consume media?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)