△ MENU/TOP △

Holtz Communications + Technology

Shel Holtz
Communicating at the Intersection of Business and Technology
SearchClose Icon

FIR #437: AI Takes Root in the Workplace

FIR #437: AI Takes Root in the Workplace

  • FIR #437: AI Takes Root in the Workplace

Research finds that corporations no longer see AI as a novelty; it’s a full-blown business tool, one that is so critical that its development is mostly being done in-house. In the November long-form episode of “For Immediate Release,” Neville and Shel review new research about AI’s place in the business world and among employees. Also in this episode, we take a look at social media in 2024—a consequential year—and what to expect in 2025. Beutler Ink has published its principles for ethically engaging with Wikipedia. Companies will twist themselves in knots deciding whether, and how, to respond to social and political issues that arise during the next four years of the second Trump Administration. Bluesky’s growing popularity, and an open API, has led to a burgeoning collection of third-party apps. And Coca-Cola misfired with an AI-generated holiday commercial…or did they? In his Tech Report, Dan York looks at the post-Twitter social media world, Bluesky’s looming challenges, X’s reminder that it owns your account; the impending court decision on the TikTok ban, and Australia’s new law banning social media for children under 16.

The next monthly, long-form episode of FIR will drop on Monday, December 23.

We host a Communicators Zoom Chat most Thursdays at 1 p.m. ET. To obtain the credentials needed to participate, contact Shel or Neville directly, request them in our Facebook group, or email .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address).

Special thanks to Jay Moonah for the opening and closing music.

You can find the stories from which Shel’s FIR content is selected at Shel’s Link Blog. Shel has started a metaverse-focused Flipboard magazine. You can catch up with both co-hosts on Neville’s blog and Shel’s blog.

Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in this podcast are Shel’s and Neville’s and do not reflect the views of their employers and/or clients.

Links from this episode:

Links from Dan York’s Tech Report:

xx

Raw Transcript:

Hi everyone and welcome to for Immediate Release. This is the monthly long form edition, episode 4 3 7 for November, 2024. I’m Neville Hobson coming to you from crew Kern Somerset in England. On a time when the weather’s weird as usual. We have high temperatures at the moment compared to snow.

We had a week or two back, but here we are with another episode. And boy do we have topics here. We do, I’m Shell Holtz in Concord, California. It’s California. It’s sunny and nice. That’s why I live here. Yeah. Nice. We do have a great episode for you today. We will be talking about social media in the year that is wrapping up and the year ahead.

We will look at the realities of generative artificial intelligence in the workplace today. Get beyond the hype and look at where things actually are ethical. Wikipedia editing is on our docket [00:01:00] today, as are the challenges the companies are going to face speaking out about social issues in the next four years.

Gosh, I wonder what’s happening in the next four years. We’ll also take a look at the growing ecosystem of apps for the social network, blue Sky and Coca-Cola’s advertising disaster. Dan York is here with terrific report and we will get into all of that after we do a quick rundown of the short midweek episodes that you ha may have missed since our October long form monthly episode.

Indeed, and we’ve only done three since the last monthly. But, and we’ve been busy. Yeah, there have been some time pressures, I must admit. But three’s good. Some great topics we talked about. So the first one, episode 4 34 that we published in November the 13th, was looking at the reports and what people have been saying about the.

The analyses following the US presidential election [00:02:00] and that fact emerged, or a view emerged that mainstream media and social media willed of far less influence than they have in the past and influences and podcasts helps sway. So we talked about that and the impact on communicators way for way beyond the election.

In fact, interesting topic we talked about. Episode 4 35 on November the 20th that talked about that topic. That is a recurring topic these days it seems, which is return to work. But this was the mandated returns was the theme of this one. And talking about the reasons executives give to their employees why this is important.

Talked about the serendipitous opportunities people miss if they don’t come back to the office and they need to boost productivity, which coming back to the office does. And of course there’s alternate views on that. That’s one of the reasons we talked about this. And indeed you had the example of a financial services company that has seen IPOing increases in performance metrics since listening to its employees and adopting a puzzle.

Let [00:03:00] it’s them, choose where they want to work. No mandated back to the office. That was a good one, and I think you’ve got a comment on that one, Cheryl. We do from Diane K, who said that the episode was timely. Given the move to return all federal employees to full-time in office, I suspect that’s a way to reduce the ranks more than anything else.

She wrote in a comment to the LinkedIn post on that episode. Interesting. So then episode 4 36 that we recorded just a week ago actually. That again Blue Sky. We’re gonna talk about Blue Sky, as you mentioned Shell at the beginning in this episode. And this was a midweek short episode just on Blue Sky.

That it was an interesting one that talked about what they’re trying to do how they’re growing it what’s important to them. And we looked at the potential of Blue Sky and whether communicators should consider establishing a presence for the competitor for other companies or clients and why they should do that.

A timely topic without [00:04:00] doubt, that’s the reason we did it. ‘cause I keep seeing nothing but blue Sky being mentioned across mainstream media in the UK now has got that attention. So it’s definitely on an attention roll without any question. So that was a good one. We have a comment for this one too, don’t we?

Actually, two. The first one from our friend Lee Hopkins in Adelaide, Australia said totally agree joined nine months ago was Oh, underwhelmed ignored it. Now in involved with it because more and more of our tribes are appearing on it. And our friend Donna Papa Acosta said, same for me. I’m sure many have that view.

I see people talking about that themselves in post on Blue Sky. And just in case anyone didn’t know this, you and I joined Blue Sky during the during the private beta in 2003 2023 I should say. And it was a tool that. Sat there and we didn’t really do much whilst we were paying attention to threads at that time.

I I know, but suddenly, this has really kicked off [00:05:00] since beginning of November, coincidentally around the time of the US presidential election and Trump being the winner, an exodus, big time. Not the sense of closing down and moving, but moving and maybe keeping things back there. Things have evolved from that now and it’s certainly something that is getting attention from 7 million subscribers to 23 million in the space of a couple of months.

So this is no idle thing. Is it? The next big thing? That was something we talked about. That remains to be seen, but it’s a, it’s an interesting topic and a hot one for communicates without doubt. So the other thing we did in November was publish a new fi interview. On the 6th of November.

We published this. This was with Monique Nik. Her name will be familiar to you if you are focused on internal communication in particular. But we had a great conversation with Monique, didn’t we? Where she talked about trends, AI and authenticity and internal communication quite a bit about her book that she had [00:06:00] published a few months back.

But that was a really good conversation with Monique. It was, and we had a co a comment on that one too. This from IABC and Mina’s official account saying this is what IEBC is about. Members connecting, sharing insights, and inspiring others globally. It must have been talking about Monique and me, since you’re not a member.

Also wanna let everyone know that circle of Fellows has been posted as it is every month. Episode number 110 focuses on executive communication. I was joined by four IEBC Phil Fellows Alice Brink, Julie Holloway, Marianne McCauley, and Bish Mukerjee joined us from India to talk about executive communications that is up now on the FIR Podcast Network, both for video viewing and for listening.

As a podcast, there is a Circle of Fellows feed that you can subscribe to. Oh, episode 111 is coming on December [00:07:00] 19th at 11:30 AM Eastern Time. We will be talking about communication, serving as a foundation. I’ll be joined by Russell Grossman. He’s from over there in the UK with you, Neville. Theo Mary Car, Caras Martha Muzyka and Neil Griffith, who’s also UK based.

Again, December 19th. That’s a Thursday at 11:30 AM Eastern Time. I’ll be moderating that panel. I’m looking forward to it. I, it’s a, it’s an intriguing topic. I think it leaves us a lot of latitude for discussion. It should be fun. And now it’s time to jump into those stories that I listed at the beginning today.

But not until we’ve had an opportunity to sell you something.

I think most of us would agree that 2024 has been a tumultuous year in many areas of society in our lives, but our focus on social media in this topic, we’re gonna talk about wide ranging events in that landscape have characterized [00:08:00] 2024 threads hit 270 5 million users according to Mark Zuckerberg.

The turbulence and sharp decline of x formerly Twitter, the sudden emerges of blue sky as a compelling alternative, racking up 23 million users in a matter of weeks, as I mentioned earlier, and the rise of movements like Brett Summer redefining online culture. It’s been nothing short of a seismic year for social media.

As platforms rise and fall and user behaviors shift in real time, the need to anticipate the next wave of change has never been more urgent. Two standout reports from Batten Hall and we are social published just a few days ago, offer us unique lenses through which to understand each shifts in the year ahead.

In social, Batten Hall highlights the importance of social first strategies, AI driven insights, and the growing role of private digital spaces like messaging apps. At the same time, we are socials Think Forward 2025. The Livable Web Special Edition shines a [00:09:00] light on cultural and emotional trends such as users craving deeper connections, rejecting polished perfection, and seeking moments of joy in an overwhelming world.

Let’s unpack some of the key ideas from these reports and explore what they mean for communicators. Batten Hole predicts a shift where social media will no longer be an add-on to marketing strategies, but the primary focus in 2025 being social first means ensuring social platforms drive the entire user journey.

With ai, evolving the potential to refine messaging, protect communities, and unlock predictive insights will be transformative. However, brands must also navigate the rise of dark social spaces, those private networks where authentic personal engagement can thrive. And as users increasingly migrate to platforms like Threads and Blue Sky, the social sorting process will reshape the digital landscape, forcing communicators to rethink where and how they connect with audiences.[00:10:00]

On the cultural side, we are social emphasizes a broader emotional evolution in digital spaces. Gen Z rejects the polished, curated ideals of the past in favor of unfiltered authenticity, finding connection in chaotic, relatable content like Charlie X’s breadth Summer. Meanwhile, amidst global crises, many users are turning to lighthearted, low stakes interactions online, celebrating small luxuries, embracing wholesome hobbies, and seeking relief through uplifting content.

This trend compliments the rise of intentional consumerism where audiences increasingly cherish sustainability and meaningful use of what they already own over relentless consumption. We’re also seeing the growth of modern myth making where fans actively engage with hidden narratives and Easter eggs in brand storytelling, strengthening their emotional ties.

Finally, the push for new intimacies signals a shift back to the social roots of social media with users [00:11:00] craving more personal communal experiences in their digital lives. Together these trends highlight a social media ecosystem that’s becoming more strategic, more emotional, and more human communicators will need to adapt their strategies, not only to follow technological advancements, but also to align with shifting cultural values and emotional needs.

So as we take a look at these predictions, shell, do you have any trends mentioned here or others even that most resonate with you? There are several here that resonated with me. One being using the social space as a primary focus. I think that is important, but I don’t think that it is an all or nothing proposition.

I, I. I’m thinking about the fact that more and more people, particularly among Gen Z and millennials, are getting their news from Instagram and TikTok. The question is, where are the influencers who are presenting that news, [00:12:00] getting the news that they present? A lot of them are reading news. On TikTok, there are hundreds of people who have lots of followers who all they do is read news stories out of magazines and newspapers.

So if we stop. Getting our content into magazines and newspapers. Then the influencer influencers who are reading that are gonna read stuff that in which we have no share of voice. So I would not ignore the mainstream press. It’s just a reprioritization that I think we need to look at. Another one that really struck me is the need to get involved in private digital spaces, the WhatsApp groups.

Really attracting more and more young people who want to have the network, but they wanna have it with a group of people that they wanna interact with and not the whole world. And tools like WhatsApp and Snapchat allow them to do that. So how do we break through to those folks? So I these are trends that I think are absolutely coming [00:13:00] and, the social network that I still don’t hear people talking about very much. Ev everybody’s talking about blue sky and there’s a good reason for that. I’m not saying that it, we shouldn’t, and it’s not important, but Reddit is still there. Reddit is still one of the top visited sites on the web and tremendous influences wielded there.

I don’t know that it’s at the same level it was when they called it the front page of the internet. And when Buzzfeed was the hottest thing on the planet, they were getting the stories they were gonna do based on what was trending on Reddit. But it’s still an important place with some very granular communities that are not difficult to join.

And, if you’re a communicator looking to wield influence over people wielding influence over people on Reddit, it’s not a bad idea, but nobody talks about it. On the topic of Reddit, I’ve been user of Reddit since what, 2006, 2007? Active recently in particular. But I think it, it’s, I agree with you by the way, [00:14:00] but isn’t it really to do with.

If your audience is there, then that is where you need to go too, because you need to go where your audience is, but Right. And therefore, Reddit’s definitely not a kind of mainstream destination for everyone, again, depending on your audience. So I look at some of the some of the subreddits I’m participating, and these are niches.

These are absolutely not Oh, mainstream. They’ve got big numbers, no question. Did, I saw a report just yesterday saying that in the uk, Reddit has now got more action going on than any other social network that needs to be nuanced a bit in terms of understanding who is there actually, is it is it your millennial group?

They’re not there. It’s the Gen Zs there. But which topic? ‘cause in this group over there, it’s actually full of boomers. So it’s a very complex network that needs you to be I think very clear on who you, your audiences are there. And if they’re there, then that’s where you need to be.

I think every organization should find out if there are subreddits that include [00:15:00] people talking about their space, and then analyze is this a large enough community that it warrants our attention who’s in this community? It doesn’t need to be large if these are all serious influencers. Who are taking what they learned through their interactions on Reddit and sharing it elsewhere to large audiences.

This is what used to happen with Buzzfeed, and I just think that the, by the way, the other thing is that I’m noticing more and more of my Google searches are pointing me to Reddit conversations where the answer is particularly on how to issues, because there are a lot of those out there.

There’s, subreddits around the Meta Quest VR headset. There’s subreddit. There’s subreddits for virtually every digital product out there where the fans of it and people who are wrestling with them are interacting with one another. So it’s actually driving traffic. Google drives traffic to Reddit.

So another reason to consider that another thing that you mentioned was unfiltered [00:16:00] authenticity. And I think that’s. Something that people really need to be paying attention to. We do something where I work. It’s a takeover Tuesday where young project engineers, this is an entry level position in the construction industry.

Take over our Instagram account and showcase whatever project they’re working on. And this is on Instagram stories and they’re pretty popular. There’s something about having these young employees talk authentically, but enthusiastically. It’s genuine authentic. Enthusiasm and it comes through that I think people really appreciate.

And, in terms of our audience, which, we’re not trying to convince people to build their $600 million building with us by watching an Instagram story. We’re trying to convince engineering students to come work for us. And it’s pretty enticing stuff when you see somebody just a little older than you just outta school a year or two, wearing their PPE out on a an active construction site, waxing poetic about how great this project [00:17:00] is.

That type of thing goes a long way. And I think companies would do well to consider that kind of, curated employee generated content. Yeah. One thing always surprises me when we talk about this kind of thing. Surely this can’t be like, oh, that’s a good idea for a listener. This is not a new thing.

This is what you should be doing. Always. Surely knowing your audiences, tailoring your communication to them, engaging with them in ways that I’ll use the word authentic, which has many meanings depending on a number of factors. So maybe this is part of it that what goes around, comes around in the sense that we are hearing in these reports, particularly from we are social or Bat Batten Hall too, for that matter, on the desire from certain origin, particularly younger generations for meaningful communication with brands, let’s say.

So the perfectionist the slick production values, created content that has been at the forefront for years. In fact, I was thinking today, looking [00:18:00] at on, on one of the TV channels that day, I actually watched, I. Terrestrial TV for a long first, for a long time seeing. We’re seeing now all the ads from the cosmetics firms and these are slick movie quality productions with celebrities doing the voiceovers.

And I often wonder, and I’m thinking this more now, who on earth relates to that? Normal people don’t really, maybe it’s aspirational. Again, I’m not gonna do an heavy analysis, but that surely is what we are moving away from. This is what the survey, these results of these reports tell us. People are looking for more honest, more relatable.

Messaging from brands they’d like to engage with, that they can actually believe. And that is not believable. Those amazing lifestyle ads for cosmetic brands. So I wonder why the hell they do that And they must make money at it, sell more stuff at Christmas. That could be it. They’re trying to reach the people who can afford those perfumes and colognes, right?

And that’s not, that’s gotta be it necessarily. Gen Z. That’s gotta be it right now. Johnny Depp isn’t gonna appeal to [00:19:00] anybody in Gen Z anyway, right? I don’t know if you’ve seen him. It’s gotta be the case. Yeah. Cologne. Yeah, he’s a pitchman now. What can I say? One other. Trend that you mentioned that I was intrigued by was this craving for communal experiences.

And I think there’s another opportunity. We used to have a lot of organizations that had departments focused on promotional activities. I remember when I worked at Mattel, we had hot wheel races and malls all around the country, people getting together and doing stuff together. And I don’t read about that kind of thing that much anymore.

And I think there are opportunities for brands to arrange activities and events for people to get together in the real world and do something. Imagine the Instagram photos that will come out of things like that. And, in the scheme of things, not the world’s most expensive approach to marketing either.

No, I think that’s what we are social refer to as new intimacies in their report [00:20:00] where people are craving deeper connections and seeking online spaces that foster community driven interactions. What does that mean for community? Goes well you’ve pretty much nailed it. Leverage niche communities and personalize your engagement strategies.

And I think, again, this seems so obvious, but focus on creating spaces where audiences feel seen and valued and that’s not new. But this is, again, something that we need to be doing more of in this changing environment. So there’s lots to take away in these reports, by the way. Batten Halls is a well produced, easy to digest, and in the content sense way, in the way in which it’s Pres presented.

So if you go to the website, fill out the form, and you’ll get a PDF version. We are socials. On the other hand, there’s what I called an everything reality presentation. There’s video, there’s animated graphics, animated texts, even talking heads popping up here and there only available in your browser.

So that’s a whole different proposition. It actually got me thinking a lot, the contrast between the [00:21:00] two. Maybe we are social as they absolutely at a Gen Z audience, at the exclusion almost of anyone else. If you want a nice comfortable PDF, you can read at your leisure. You’re not gonna get it. This is real time in the moment.

You’ll see this and you’ll need to have your headphones on or your speaker on because it’s an audio visual presentation. It’s very well done. Different approaches, they’re different topics, but they’re very complimentary both from Bassen Hall and we are social. I think they had a really good job presenting all of this as other reports have come out too in the past couple of weeks.

And you’ll find ‘em if you search on similar themes, what’s been happening in 2024 for social media and what’s coming in 2025 and what you need to pay attention to. And a bit of overlap in all of them, but these two did strike me as definitely worth paying attention to. And there are, there will be links in the show notes.

No, no shortage of what’s coming in 2025 posts out. There’re the season, aren’t we? Shall this is the time for everyone to do their report? Yeah. Yeah. And also on, on we are social it’s a, it’s an unspoken final [00:22:00] comment that to their presentation, which is, if this is what we did to present our own report, imagine what we could do for you.

Nice one. The landscape of workplace AI adoption has undergone a pretty remarkable transformation over the last year. Speaking of looking back, organizations have moved beyond the g whiz phase into serious implementation and experimentation. According to comprehensive new research from the Wharton School and Marketing consultancy, GBK Collective, we’re witnessing what could be characterized as AI’s coming of age story in the enterprise.

Let’s start with the headline number that. Really grabbed my attention. 72% of companies now report using AI at least weekly for work purposes. That’s nearly double the 37% reported just last year. Now, what’s particularly fascinating is where this growth is happening. While you might expect IT departments to be leading the charge, we’re seeing dramatic [00:23:00] increases in adoption instead across all functional areas, including departments that were previously hesitant, adopters like marketing, operations, and hr.

This is entirely consistent with the message I’ve been sending as much as I can. This isn’t like Workday, where it implements software. Everyone will be using pretty much the same and can train everyone the same on how to use it with generative ai at this point especially use of the frontier models like Chat, GPT, Claude Gemini, every individual and department has to figure out for themselves how it’s gonna help.

Speaking of organizational structure, though, one of the most intriguing developments is how companies are adapting their leadership to accommodate AI Integration about one in five organizations, 21% to be exact, have now created Chief AI Officer. I. Physicians, we’ll see how long that lasts. I imagine there’s been a significant decline in the number of Chief Metaverse officers over the last couple of years.

I have to say, I still shake my head [00:24:00] at how loosely so many organizations imply the officer label anyway, the vast majority of companies, 91% are keeping their AI strategy development in-house. They’re not relying on outside consultants. This suggests to me that organizations are viewing AI not just as another tool to implement, but as a core competency they need to develop internally.

It also suggests there’s gonna be some serious consolidation among all those AI consultancies that have cropped up. The employee’s perspective has evolved significantly as well. Remember the early days when workers viewed AI with a mixture of anticipation, amazement, and trepidation that shifted fairly dramatically.

Today, 90% of employees see AI as skill enhancing rather than job threatening. That’s up 80% last year. I’m sorry, that’s up from 80% last year. The shift in perception from replacement to enhancement is crucial for successful adoption. I am, however, still [00:25:00] detecting reluctance to use it among a lot of employees, even millennial and Gen Z employees, largely due to personal security concerns.

What I find particularly telling is that about half of enterprises currently have few or no restrictions on AI usage in the work workplace. This repre represents a remarkable level of organizational trust in both technology and employees judgment. In using it, however, it’s worth noting that larger organizations tend to implement more stringent controls.

Only 15% of companies with annual revenue over $2 billion allow unrestricted AI use, suggesting a more measured approach. As the stakes increase, it may be in these companies, you’ll find those employees who won’t use it for fear of getting in trouble or use it, but don’t tell anyone for fear of getting in trouble.

Investment patterns tell an interesting story too. While 72% of companies plan to increase AI budgets next year, 57% anticipate these increases will be moderate [00:26:00] just between one and 10%. This suggests we’re entering a phase of more calculated ROI focused deployment rather than spend at all cost approach that we saw in the early adoption phases.

What we’re witnessing comes down to AI’s transition from a speculative technology to a practical business tool. The key now will be how organ organizations balance enthusiasm with pragmatism and innovation with responsible governance. It is interesting. You, it reminds me something you mentioned there about Chief AI Officer, we talked about that, the kind of expansion of c-Suite job titles quite a few times, maybe at least two episodes.

We’ve talked about that recently. And this strike struck me when I heard you say it. This is an example of that. Here we go again. You said how long it will last. That’s the thing. Yet for many organizations, I’m sure that is what they’re gonna have to do to get this on, get traction with this whole topic rather than being done piecemeal.

But it is [00:27:00] interesting. The Wharton report, I was reading the summary as you were talking. They are concluding that, and this will be like yeah. Type response you might have to this, which is what they’re saying. Organizations will keep experimenting with AI to figure out how it works best for them.

Yes. That’s what they should be doing. And you’ve got some metrics in here which kind of emphasize the value of doing that. It’s interesting, one thing they note as it evolves so will other technology required to make it more usable and practical, such as voice interface. So there’s a lot of things happening in parallel that may not be apparent when you first think about how am I gonna use AI in the workplace?

But also one thing it relates to what you said employees perhaps using a tool that without telling anyone because it’s not authorized, that’s exactly what’s going on in many organizations and the companies that. Don’t open that up in a better way than this are the ones who are likely to suffer, I would say.

Because what happens, [00:28:00] it’s inevitable. I was thinking back to some, something someone told me not long ago, that they’re not allowed to use chat GPT in the workplace. So what they do is download a copy from the website under a different name, even the student if you like, and they use that for their work stuff.

By contrast in a large organization where chat, GPT and others like it offer, what do we call ‘em, an enterprise version of their tool, that’s a wholly different animal to the consumer version that you just download off the website. So you end up then through through bad policies in the organization is how I pitch it in a sense how I describe it.

Opening yourself up to all sorts of risks by not. Having a, an effective way that recognizes people’s concerns and enables them to do something about it rather than blanket, you’re not allowed to do this, and so they go ahead and do it anyway. That says a lot about the organization. That’s a different avenue to explore, but trust and belief [00:29:00] and all that stuff is in there and that’s lacking in that situation.

That’s dangerous to my mind. There’s lots to think about in this. It seems to be what a lot of employees are also doing is getting the chat CPT app on their personal phones. And it’s similar. Yeah. They just use it in a lot of organizations at this point, what employees have access to is Microsoft Co-pilot which is a difficult tool to parse considering the many flavors of co-pilot. But there is the base co-pilot that just comes with Office 365. That basically gives you an interface that is chat PT four. Oh, that’s, Microsoft does not have their own frontier model. They’re investing billions and billions in open ai.

And so this is what employees are using is chat PT for, even if if the company is saying you can’t use chat CPT they’re using co-pilot. So I think it’s interesting that organizations think that they’re preventing something bad [00:30:00] from happening. Although when you go through copilot.

Your queries your prompts don’t get saved and used as training fodder for future models. So that’s one reason companies may want employees to do that. I think those organizations that are saying, we don’t want you using chat, CPT use copilot employees should shrug and say, fine, because it’s the same damn thing I am.

I, I don’t use copilot. I have, Microsoft 365 subscription, all that. But I don’t like the style of it that’s the reality. And it may well be the best thing since Slice Brent, which I do not believe. It is quite well for employees who have no choice though. It’s there. They can use it.

But if you have choice I think I’d use something else, but it’s the landscape shell that’s basically it. There’s so many, ways you can use a generative AI tool. And there are many generative AI tools out there. To me that reinforces the reality in an organizational setting to [00:31:00] set out very clear guidance to employees on what to use, how to use, when to use it, and why without being, read the 65 page instructions on what you gotta do.

Don’t do that. People aren’t stupid. You gotta trust people. Although I hear people arguing that you can’t trust people. That’s a hell of a place to be if that’s your belief. We’ve done a ton of communication around AI where I work and employees know that it’s there. They know they have access.

What they’re asking is, okay, how do I use it? So we’re now planning some lunch and learns around effective prompting and things like that. I think this is what communicators need to be doing is one, they need to be. Promoting the responsible use of generative AI in the organization, highlighting whatever policy is in place, letting people know what the risks are, letting people know what the organization’s plans are for advancing the use of Gen ai, but also helping people figure out how they can figure [00:32:00] out how to take advantage of it.

In their jobs, how to write good prompts, how to figure out which tools are appropriate for you how to figure out how to identify those workflows in your job where AI can make you more productive, make you more effective, make you more creative. If that’s what’s called for. The more we do that and the more we share stories of employees who are doing it, the more everybody’s gonna get it and say, oh I can do that.

And start using it. So I think we have a very important role to play on the internal communication side of things. Totally agree. Opportunity for communicators. I have no question. We all know what Wikipedia is, the encyclopedia anyone can edit founded by Jimmy Wales back in 2001. I use it daily. Not often, not consciously.

If I’m searching for something, whether I do ask the question in Google, increasingly less likely [00:33:00] these days, or via perplexity, which is my preferred alternative to Google for the kind of how do I, where is, what is et cetera type questioning or even what’s the phone number of the pharmacy? It’s your favorite one, shall I know.

Wikipedia shows up still in typically in the top five or six search results, again, depending on what it is that you’re searching for. So it has evolved. It is a phenomenal resource. And it has, I have to say just. Because it fits in what you’re saying. I use it mainly when I’m watching tv.

For example, we watched a six part documentary about Wyatt Earp and the Cowboy Wars, and they talked about Kate Elder. And I said, yeah, I wonder if that was the same elder as Katie Elder in the movie, the Sons of Katie Elder. And I said, I’m gonna go to Wikipedia and find out. And I do that all the time.

When I’m watching anything with a historical context, I’m always using Wikipedia in front of the television. You’re a good use case. Shell. That’s a good use case. [00:34:00] In the organizational communication context, Wikipedia has a big role for communicators. And one of the things we’ll talk about now, and it’s a topic we have talked about before, and particularly going back some years is a valid topic ethical.

Editing of Wikipedia. So we’re gonna revisit this using the example of Butler Inc. And I’ll explain what Butler Inc is in a minute. So to set the scene a bit Wikipedia’s been a foundational pillar of the internet for over two decades from its founding. It’s the fifth most, most visited website globally.

Still. I remember it’s being claimed that for some time it’s an invaluable resource for billions of people. It’s a, it is critical in shaping public perception, often appearing at the top of search results. Additionally, it’s vast repository of information is a crucial source of training AI models. And by the way, it’s worth mentioning because some people think there’s only an English language version.

There’s not, there’s I think, 300 different language versions of Wikipedia, all of [00:35:00] different sizes in terms of content of what they have and how much of it. But Wikipedia’s, open and collaborative Nature poses unique challenge for communicators and PR professionals while its guidelines prohibit those with conflicts of interest from directly editing entries.

The temptation to bend these rules has led to controversies and mistrust between the Wikipedia community and corporate interests. We’ll revisit the topic of ethical Wikipedia entry, focusing on Butler, Inc. A digital agency that has set the gold standard for navigating this complex terrain. Founded by William Butler, a widely regarded expert in public relations for Wikipedia.

Euler Inc. Has pioneered ethical practices that aligned with Wikipedia’s principles such as neutrality and transparency. Earlier this year you and I shall had the opportunity to interview William in an FI interview where we explored the evolving relationship between Wikipedia and the PR industry, the growing influence of AI on Wikipedia’s ecosystem, and the nuances of ethical editing.

And by the [00:36:00] way, we’ll have a link to that interview in the show notes in an article published on the 25th of November. Butler, Inc. Set out their commitment to four core principles for engaging with Wikipedia. The first is neutral point of view, ensuring that all edits reflect a balanced and fair representation of the subject.

Second, transparency, disclosing conflicts of interest and intentions to the Wikipedia editing community. Third, collaboration, working with volunteer editors instead of circumventing them or attempting to exert control. And fourth, respect for Wikipedia’s rules following the platform’s, policies and guidelines without exception.

These principles speak to Butler Ink’s values in upholding the highest ethical standards. When engaging with the encyclopedia and this community of volunteer editors, they form a framework, not just for Butler ink’s work, but also as a model for how PR professionals and organizations should approach Wikipedia.

They demonstrate that ethical editing is not only possible, [00:37:00] but essential for maintaining trust between Wikipedia’s editors, readers, and the organizations that seek representation on the platform. In the article, William reflected on these guiding principles and how they have shaped Butler Inc’s success.

By prioritizing collaboration and transparency, the agency has avoided the pitfalls of unethical practices such as covert editing or promotional bias, which undermine Wikipedia’s credibility. But Inc’s work has proven that ethical consulting is not just a choice, it’s a responsibility for anyone engaging with Wikipedia.

This topic resonates deeply with me as I’ve directed projects in recent years requiring strict adherence to Wikipedia’s policies, ensuring neutrality and transparency. The But Inc model exemplifies how communicators can navigate this challenging space building trust with the editing community and their clients.

These principles should be the benchmark for anyone working on Wikipedia, setting a standard of ethics that others must follow. [00:38:00] So I’d like to hear your perspective shell, on the importance of these core principles. How do you think PR professionals can adopt these as benchmarks to foster credibility and alignment with Wikipedia’s ethos?

And what lessons can we take from butyl ink’s approach to ethical editing, especially given the increasing influence of AI on the platform? That’s two questions there. Actually. I thought there’s two questions You may have to remind me of the second one after I answer the first one. I think that these are.

Blinding flashes of the obvious. These are things that we have known for a long time. Butler Ink does a wonderful job of embodying these in its practice. The challenge is, I think, getting this information into the hands of people who are planning to, or needing to engage with content on Wikipedia.

I think there are organizations that routinely engage with Wikipedia. They’re big brands, for example, they have lots of products, lots of [00:39:00] trademarks. They’re in the news a lot what have you. But I would think that most people who engage with Wikipedia do it once, right? Somebody reaches out and said, Hey, did you know that the listing for your company shows your last earnings report from 2008?

And so you get in touch to try to see if you can get that updated and it can be a struggle they’ve never heard of you. You’re, you’re new to the platform. I went through this recently and I know how to engage with Wikipedia. I’ve been using it as long as you have.

I’ve done entries in the past. But they had our former now retired, CEO listed and as the head of communications, I didn’t want to go in there and make the change. I can’t do that. And so I went into the talk section and I explained I pointed to an article from a third party news source announcing the change in the CEO and absolutely nothing happened.

I had to go back in there and beg three or four times before somebody actually made that change. It can be [00:40:00] tough for somebody who doesn’t do this routinely to stay on top or even be aware of these rules. How do you get this information into the hands of people who are maybe doing this for the first time and maybe haven’t paid attention to the nuance in the, in, in the rules that Wikipedia has established?

It is not easy without doubt, and that’s something that has been a thorn in the side of Wikipedia ever since it. Was unveiled my experience. What you did was the right thing. By the way, you don’t try and edit it. You go through the talk pages and set out, make your case, declare your conflict of interest.

And I found my experience you have an account on Wikipedia. You create a profile page yourself, setting out who you are and why you’re, and if you’ve ever edited. Emphasize all of that. And so you say to people, look, go look at my profile. I’m legit and declare the interest.

And there’s ways to do that are the Wikipedia approved ways. My experience when I started doing this some years ago now is it’s labyrinth to understand the policies and guidelines. [00:41:00] It truly is seriously difficult, which is one reason why Butler Inc. In particular is doing well in this area because they have expertise from working with done tons of clients internationally on the pro policies and procedures.

I got an education on that, on a project I worked with with Butler Incon that required me to know how to do all this. And boy, that was a, an education, but it’s actually quite straightforward in, in following it. The difficulty, I think, or a difficult, not the only one, there are many is and Bill Butler mentions this in his article.

There are organizations out there and there are PR professionals out there unfortunately, who are quite willing to bypass where they can and go in and directly edit even. Through students intentionally bypass, they know the rules intentionally and bypass them anyway. Yes. Intentionally do that.

And that’s something Bill mentioned is a major issue that that we still have to overcome. I would argue this is certainly not [00:42:00] condoning it. This is people we’re talking about and it’s the good, the bad and the ugly in every community. And this is a reflection of that I think. There were issues 15 years ago now, probably 12 to 15 years ago now.

Where things came to a head. This was mainly in the uk I think between Wikipedia and pr, where there was a complete breakdown. Any kind of relationship, communication after a number of severe scandals through big. Well-known named agencies who were uncovered to have been lying through Wikipedia entries and falsifying entries in competitors pages of their clients.

And isn’t that where crew came from? Was all of those issues? I don’t remember the name, the big names. There was some big names. No Crew was the corporate representatives for the Ethical For Ethical Wiki. Yeah. Phil Gomes started that was Phil Gomes who started that. Yeah. And that was not as because of this, but this is one of the highlights of, but the point I’m making is that there were strong efforts made in the UK directed by the CIPR.

To engage with [00:43:00] Wikimedia Foundation about this. And I took part in that as a neutral. Interesting. This a neutral participant to bridge the gap. Philip Sherick was the other one. We made a presentation to a board meeting at Wikimedia Foundation and that led to the first, if you like, policy for PR professionals developed by the CIPR not long after that, which has then evolved into sixth edition or something.

So now. It’s difficult for anyone to say, oh, I didn’t know how we have to go about. Yes you do. If you are a member of the professional body, like the CIPR in the uk, and even if you’re not, you can access these guidelines that tell you these are the steps you need to take to do this. It ain’t rocket science to understand the process.

What is rocket science is actually understanding the process. If you had to wade through. Each of the pillars, if you will, on neutral point of view, declaring conflict of interest and a raft of others that are all to do with transparency and truthfulness and honesty. It is labyrinth and if you are [00:44:00] unlucky to then engage with the editor community, the volunteer editor community, and not hear anything forever.

Or you get one of them who’s just arrogant as hell ‘cause they do exist. You have to realize to another thing that this whole structure is volunteer driven. So if you don’t hear anything, there’s not someone central. You can go and chase and say, Hey, what happened to my, it isn’t like that. You have to keep repeating it and you’ll find avenues and workarounds to get allies to make your case for you.

That requires a lot of time and hence why firms like Inc are doing well. I. Though that we are in a time when, again, those surveys we just talked about on authenticity, et cetera, is always been important in a case like this I honestly don’t see how anyone who is a practicing public relations or communicator, let’s say and a member of any of the well-regarded professional bodies could approach Wikipedia in anything [00:45:00] other than following absolutely all these principles and guidances.

And yet there are people who aren’t doing that. It needs to be, I think, emphasized that you shouldn’t be doing stuff like that. You need to understand the right way to do this. It ain’t difficult except understanding it, it is difficult. I’ll keep this short since it’s my broken record routine because there are PR people out there who.

Have not been trained who do not belong to an association, who do not feel compelled to abide by a code of ethics, who are unprincipled in their approach to their job and do it any damn way they want to. And until we come to the realization that practicing PR people must be certified and are at risk of losing that certification, and as a result losing their livelihood will continue to have PR people who will do this any damn way they want, regardless of what [00:46:00] the rules are and regardless of what resources are available out there.

Agree. I’m gonna that off my soapbox now. No, that adds to that bigger picture. We’ve talked about, I wrote about this myself on my blog a month or two back on the real issues that ought to be addressed, please, in the profession. That is to do with its credibility and this is absolutely the heart of it.

But in the meantime, for the 90% of PR professors out there who are honest, reasonable folks, I would say Wikipedia has a place in your role if you’re acting, if you’re working for. Large clients in particular, but not exclusively so that it is worth finding out how to address things and indeed to, to anyone.

Take a look at your own company’s Wikipedia entry page. Go and look at what it says about your company. Do you recognize that? And again, put out of your mind any notion of marketing talk. This is neutral point of view wars and all bad things that happened. That’s part of your history. You can’t cover that kind of thing up.[00:47:00]

So it requires reeducation for many people to get into this. The core issue though that we’ve been discussing here is just, concluding point to mention that the ethical approach is the only way you can do this as a PR professional and sleep at night basically. So this is what you need to do.

But Inc. Sets make it a good case. They’ve published their ethical guidelines and they note they’ve always had this, but they’ve never published them publicly. They’ve now done this. And if you read that, you’re thinking, yeah, we could do this, we should do this too. In which case you’ve got your blueprint there to do something greeting she and Nevo ever.

This was all around the world. Is Daniel coming at you from Shelburn, Vermont And this past month I’ve been looking a lot at where do people go in a post Twitter world? Because Twitter, of course is not Twitter anymore. It’s X and it’s a different company, a different vibe, a different thing. And now, controlled by Elon Musk and in the wake of the US presidential elections, I.

Where X was used particularly in [00:48:00] support of the campaign of Donald, of now President-elect Donald Trump. And where Elon Musk himself was very adamantly, pro-Trump, many people are starting to question, is X the place I wanna be? For some people it is, and I think it’s important to recognize that some people are finding that X still does what they want, still has the audience and is still there.

But for others, they’re saying, eh, I think I want to go somewhere else. The Guardian was one of the big ones that made this change and announced very prominently that they will no longer post on Elon Musk’s ex from its official accounts, but others are looking at that too. The challenge, of course, as communicators is that we’re moving into a much more fragmented world.

The interesting part about Twitter was that you could connect with people from all across pretty much all sectors of our society in different ways. And now we’re moving into places where it’s not that easy. It’s different, blue Sky and Threads were two of the big [00:49:00] recipients coming out of this election season.

Blue Sky had announced first that they’d added a million new members as people left X and they later announced that they’d come up. They were now at 20 million users for of the platform. Of course, threads rolled out, commented that they’ve been getting over a million people a day in November signing up, they’d have had over 35 million.

Take that blue sky where Threads and Mark Zuckerberg had announced in an earnings call that they had over 275 million users of threads. So, it’s a big player in that space. Where do you spend your time? Who’s there? Where’s your audience? These are questions that are there. I’m over on Macedon, which also saw an uptick, but not at the same scale as these two platforms, but, and I recognize it’s not for everyone there, but that’s where I’m at, and this is all happening in this space right now.

One of the reasons I haven’t been as excited about Blue Sky, people have asked me, why aren’t you just joining in like everybody else [00:50:00] is? Because it’s another centrally controlled platform now. It is, it has the promise of decentralization. And that’s one of the interesting parts is that it was developed spun out of Twitter by Jack Dorsey to go and create a decentralized social media platform.

And Jay Grabber, who’s the CEO, she and her team have done a fantastic job with developing a very, compelling platform. But it’s not quite where I would personally like it to be. There’s a great article by Christine Lemer Weber about how decentralized is blue sky really, which dives into technical pieces talking about how.

It has a promise of decentralization, but many parts of it are still centralized right now. You, there isn’t, you can’t move your account. Mine is Dan York. You can’t move that to another blue sky server in the same way you can like in Macedon, where you can move to a different instance in different server and work with that.

It’s not there yet. There’s some key components and [00:51:00] pieces around discovery, around messaging that still require the centralized services. And Blue Sky’s a company, they’ve taken some venture capital funding, which is a common way to grow, but VC companies typically want an exit. They wanna have some kind of return on their investment at some point.

And so this leads typically to the ification of other platforms that we’ve seen, whether there’ll be some method of getting that return back for the investors. Blue Sky’s also done some things like changing around the way the displays are. It used to be just reversed chronological. Now they’ve introduced.

Displaying replies by how hot they are in terms of interaction, engagement, so there’s some different pieces and parts that are moving in there, so I’m a little wary. And on top of this, we were reminded that we don’t control the handles, the account names that we have on, these social networks that are centralized.

If you’ve been paying attention at all to what’s been happening here in the United States, Alex Jones’s, [00:52:00] Infowars media sites have been up for bankruptcy due to his legal issues and with conspiracy theories and other stuff that’s been going on. The Onion purchased is in the process of purchasing all of that, coming outta the bankruptcy auction.

And that included some of the X handles and stuff. X made a legal filing saying, wait a minute, X owns every account. It can do with them, whatever it wants and it can go and do that now. Sure it’s their platform, they can control that. But it’s a reminder you are not in control. And that to me is the part that I think I worry about with some of these new platforms.

I want to be in control of my own destiny in some form, which is again, why I am partly spending a good bit of my time on Mastodon, where I have some more control. But we’ll see where this all shakes out. Speaking in platforms, tiktoks obviously a big one for short form video as we know, and it’s been under fire here in the United States with a law [00:53:00] that required its Chinese parent company by dance to dis to divest of its company, of TikTok in order to stay active in the US That’s gone through a chain of legal pieces and now it’s at a court in the in Washington DC where in theory, the first week of December, by Friday, December 6th, we’re supposed to hear a verdict, which will say, is the law valid?

Does TikTok have to divest or. Or not probably, regardless, it’s gonna go on up to the US Supreme Court. But anyway, we’ll see where that all goes. There could be changes coming to TikTok and how it’s working. A final thing, pay attention to what’s happening in Australia right now. They just passed a law banning children under the age of 16 from all social media platforms.

There’s a lot of vagueness in the law. It doesn’t actually specify which platforms. There’s a bunch of pieces. It doesn’t say how to do it. It doesn’t say how you’d limit somebody to Australia. There’s a whole host of [00:54:00] issues with the law, but they’ve put a stake in the ground that said nobody under 16 can access these platforms.

And it’s getting a lot of press right now, and it could change a lot of how we interact and engage with people and everything else. There’s a host of issues around that I could go into at great technical length around why this is broken and why it won’t work. Just geographic blocking doesn’t work.

Geographic location the means aren’t there. In theory, the law says that that you’re somehow gonna be able to be age verified without showing a government id. So who knows? The key point is watch what’s happening. The law is supposed to take effect a year from now, so in late 2025, and they’re gonna be doing some trials of different technologies and things, but a lot of other countries and states here in the US and others are looking at this.

And so pay attention to what’s happening in Australia because out of this will be some of [00:55:00] what will probably be brought into other places of the world. With that, I’m gonna wrap this up, send it back to you, shell and Neville, you can find more of my write audio and writing at Dan york, me and talk to you soon in December.

Bye for now. Thank you so much, Dan. Great report as always. Good collection of stories a couple that jump out at me. Having read about the band that Australia has imposed on people under the age of 16 for using social media I just can’t see that working. I don’t see how they’re gonna police that at all.

Be interested in watching how that unfolds. And I am very curious to see how that court decision shakes out on. TikTok although I don’t expect TikTok to go anywhere regardless of how that case ends up, because the Trump administration comes into office in January and Trump has on the campaign trail expressed his reversal [00:56:00] of opinion.

And then I was fully supportive of TikTok, which means that, it was Congress who passed the law that said it would be banned if it wasn’t sold by sometime in January, 2025. But it’s up to the Trump administration to enforce that ban. And he could easily just instruct the powers that be not to enforce it just to ignore it.

And it will just continue rolling along as it has. So interested to see how all of that turns out as well. But great report, do appreciate it. And speaking of that second Trump administration, which is. Coming in corporate America faces a critical strategic challenge, and that is when and how to engage on sociopolitical issues.

Companies are working hard right now to avoid being caught unawares as they were during Trump’s first term. When events like the 2017 Muslim travel ban Trump to nearly a hundred tech CEOs to speak out [00:57:00] against the policy. The dynamics are markedly different this time around as DEI, consultant Anne-Marie Malecha notes, during Trump’s first term, a tight labor market gave employees significant leverage in pushing companies to take stance.

Today’s economic environment has shifted that balance of power, potentially giving companies more latitude in choosing their battles. That’s likely why you’re seeing so

11/30/24 | 0 Comments | FIR #437: AI Takes Root in the Workplace

Comment Form

« Back