An issue has arisen from the Edelman/WalMart controversy that has rankled me. The idea, which has been suggested by several bloggers commenting on the blogger relations effort Edelman undertook on WalMart’s behalf, suggests that it is inappropriate for big companies to present their viewpoint to sympathetic bloggers—or any other bloggers, for that matter.

Some of those taking this position feel it is inappropriate under any circumstances. Others argue that it’s fine if the company is pitching a product or service, but not if the organization is addressing an issue or point of view.

This I believe categorically:

Organizations have every right to engage in the conversation. They are not restricted by any law, regulation, or code of ethics from using channels other than or in addition to their own blogs in order to add their viewpoints to the mix.

One blogger has made the case—endorsed by others—that a large company employing a blogger relations effort takes advantage of poor, inexperienced, gullible bloggers. It’s a specious argument. Once a blogger puts him or herself on the front line, he or she should be ready to deal with the implications of blogging. To suggest otherwise is like demading that 18-wheel trucks, ambulances and fire trucks, experienced drivers, and police cars should stay off the road whenever a teenager with a new driver’s license gets behind the wheel because they represent risk and threat to inexperienced drivers. Once you’re licensed, you simply have to get up to speed quickly and deal with what the road throws at you. If you don’t, you die.

Denying organizations a voice in the blogosphere simply by virtue of the fact that they are organizations is ludicrous. Insisting that the only voice they should be permitted is the one articulated from their own blogs is unduly restrictive; circumstances or strategy may preclude a blog for one reason or another. However, as long as organizations are ethical, transparent, and factual, they should not be constrained from employing the same tactics everyone else uses.

In the CNBC “Squawkbox” segment in which I was interviewed last week, the interviewer asked me if the WalMart campaign didn’t somehow compromise bloggers who are viewed as having independent voices. The fact is, few bloggers write solely from the inner workings of their own minds. The content of their posts are derived from material they have acquired from any number of other sources. It could be the mainstream media. It could be other blogs. It could be a review of their RSS feeds, or content they found serendipitously on a website, or something they heard on the radio or saw on TV or discussed with a friend.

I receive emails from bloggers including BL Ochman and Dave Traynor alerting me (and others; these are lists) to posts in which they believe I might be interested. I also get emails from non-bloggers like Judy Gombita who want to alert me to items I might find relevant. None of these individuals work for companies or are representing a client’s point of view. On the other hand, they wouldn’t send something that contradicted their own point of view, either, would they? But, ultimately, who cares? The source of the information isn’t important, once I’ve determined that the source is credible. We bloggers routinely select from this constant stream of information and ideas the material about which we will write. The more fodder, the better.

There’s nothing wrong with some of that information coming from an organization with an agenda as long as they disclose who they are and what their agenda is.

Joseph Thornley, of the Canadian PR firm Thornley-Fallis, suggested in a comment to The Hobson & Holtz Report that Edelman or WalMart might have headed off the current controversy by setting up a blog to include every single email sent to the bloggers recruited for the effort. I like that idea a lot; it’s similar to the Nokia n90 blogger relations blog, which establishes complete transparency because it’s a publicly accessible blog that lists all the material available to those bloggers who agreed to participate in the product launch’s blogger relations effort.

I presume the folks at Edelman will find this to be a good idea, too, and the agency is by no means to be criticized for not launching such an effort as part of its WalMart campaign. This is all new territory and we’re learning as we go, striving to be ethical and above-board while trying new approaches, identifying gaps, and discarding what doesn’t work.

But the bottom line is this: If Judy Gombita can send me pointers to articles and information so I can choose to write about it, so can any organization, whether it’s WalMart, Greenpeace, the United Auto Workers, the Jewish Defense League, the World Bank or the Republican Party. All they have to do is adhere to the guidelines Richard Edelman listed on his blog:

• Get permission from the blogger to send the information
• Be transparent about who you are, on whose behalf you’re sending the information, and why you’re sending it
• Disclose any financial arrangements or other quid pro quo
• Deliver only honest, accurate, factual information without spin

As for how bloggers use the information, that’s the blogger’s responsibility, not the organization’s or that of its PR counselors.

Technorati Tags: blogger relations