Amazon PR: Neither Open Nor Social
Is Amazon supporting Open Social? If they are, that would be big news. If they have decided not to, that would be big news too. We reported last night that Amazon was announcing support for the Google-led protocol, along with a number of other smaller announcements.
We've been on the phone and email with Amazon's PR department all day today. It's been a great example of the challenges any of these huge companies face in trying to be either Open or Social, much less both.
The long and short of it is this: Amazon has nothing to say; they told us they did, but they don't. If they do have anything to say they would like to say it through words put into my mouth. Thanks, Amazon. I don't think you've got much Openness to bring to my Social even if that is what you intend to do.
Here's the time-line.
1. Amazon approached us a week ago with a draft press release. They told us this release was "big news." It was announcing support for Open Social, the "first ever" access to Unbox and MP3 files for affiliates (actually not true, it's been months since that happened) and the availability of new RSS feeds for things like most popular items in various categories. Did you know that there's been no RSS feeds for top selling items in categories at Amazon.com? Well, there is now - and they were so excited that they figured it out, that they wrote it up in a press release.
2. The press release, though clearly a draft (not uncommon, PR people send us draft releases all the time), is dated November 15th. So 12:00 AM EST on the 15th arrived last night and I wrote up a post - after figuring out at the last minute that the claims in the release about "first ever" access to MP3s are the kind of information that uninformed journalists fall for and power users laugh at us for printing. Typical of too much PR practice, someone's trying to trick me, not make both our jobs easier. I added snark to my post about this, but I took it out just to be decent - it was clearly a draft release and there's no need to be nasty more than I really need to be.
3. Post went up, I had a nice night vacuuming my living room floor.
4. In the morning I woke up to a flurry of emails. According to an email sent to one of our writers at 11:59 PM EST the night before one minute before the release time - they threw on the brakes. Our writer wasn't awake and didn't see it until the morning, when we both received more emails insisting that we remove the post, that the release "was never issued," no statement's been made, it's not true and it's still under embargo anyway. Frustrating, but funny.
5. I then put up an update reading:
"Update: Amazon contacted us this morning to let us know that though they sent us a draft press release, they are not in fact making any such announcement, they are not supporting OpenSocial and if they were it would still be under embargo anyway despite the date on said release."
I twittered about the absurdity of it all and Valleywag picked up the story. It was Read/WriteWeb's second appearance on Valleywag today and we felt naughty by association.
6. I talked to various Amazon people throughout the day on the phone, refusing (very nicely) to take down the story or remove all references to Open Social. They did not like the update I posted.
They were not happy, but they were nice enough about it. What can you do when dealing with a blogger? We are so irrational and hard to communicate with!
I offered to post a different update if they'd like to send me a statement. I meant a statement from them.
7. They sent me the following.
"Since the publication of this post, an Amazon spokesperson contacted me to clarify that no announcement was made in regards to support for Open Social. The Amazon spokesperson went on to say that Social network developers have been using the Amazon Associates Web Service to merchandise Amazon products (and earn Associates commissions) for some time. She indicated that Amazon would continue to provide developers with tools that allow them to choose the platform that makes the most sense for them regardless of the Social networking site they are building on. She pointed out..." blah blah blah.
I cannot believe they'd send me text written in the first person and expect me to post it under my own name! Not to mention the really uptight language they've got that puppet named Marshall using! I tried to mock them coyly but without cruelty at the top of the original post.
The Grand Finale
The conclusion of this ridiculous story is that I've put up this post here.
In some ways, this isn't about communicating with bloggers at all. When one billion dollar company is considering interacting formally with other billion dollar companies - why would you tell press about it before everyone is sure and why would you just generally drop the ball like this?
In regards to this particular situation, though, Amazon is probably not alone in a group that includes Google, MySpace, Bebo and a long list of other giant companies in not understanding what it means to be Open or Social. If these people can't communicate like human beings with a blogger going out of my way to be nice to them, why on earth should I be excited about their finding religion and embracing the OpenSocial Brand Platform?
FOLLOW RWW ON TWITTER
RECENT JOBS
Comments
Subscribe to comments for this post OR Subscribe to comments for all ReadWriteWeb posts
PR is so broken it's not even funny. These people actually get paid money to interface with bloggers and writers. I hope Jeffy gets wind of this, if I were him I'd be embarrassed.
But I won't write a complaint without a solution.
We need a series of small conferences/meetings where these big company PR folks sit down with us, talk about how we work, what our morals are, and then work with them to fit it into what they do. NOT the other way around.
Fix it now people, or you'll be completely ignored by bloggers not as nice as Marshall.
Posted by: drew olanoff | November 15, 2007 6:23 PM
That's hilarious. If PR reps are going to be daring enough to send draft press releases and not send out either a final or an email that the draft isn't going to be released, they need to take responsibility for their actions. This crap is why I quit Intel PR.
Posted by: francine hardaway | November 15, 2007 6:39 PM
Ouch! But what a great post Marshall, about not realizing that PR 101 can and should be applied to the blogosphere, e.g, "you will know how journalists/bloggers work."
Posted by: Kathleen Mazzocco | November 15, 2007 6:57 PM
This is why I said to you before, embargoes are bullshit. In fact, I'd like to see a nice fat headline up near the top of RRW: "Embargos Not Honored." Then, if someone sends you an embargoed PR, having obviously not bothered to look at the site, whoops.
Posted by: Curt | November 15, 2007 8:47 PM
Curt, I think embargoes are totally legit. This was a ridiculously messed up embargo but it's also a great example of a time when an embargo is a good idea. If "we're supporting OpenSocial" announcements meant anything (they don't, everyone is making them and they're just talk right now) then it would be a good idea for everyone to be able to spend a good amount of time looking at what's being announced. That way no one rushes to be first and coverage of an important event is shallow. That's how I see it.
Posted by: Marshall Kirkpatrick | November 15, 2007 8:51 PM
Those of you who read my blog know that 1. I'm a flack and 2. my blog is about effective use of social media PR/marketing. You're right, Marshall. This has nothing to do with "blogger relations." In the modern news cycle, you don't send a release out without commitment. Sounds like some wires got crossed between Biz Dev, Marketing and PR.
Posted by: Chris Lynn | November 15, 2007 9:18 PM
While this experience was, no doubt, painful for everyone involved, this recap is an incredibly solid piece of journalism.
It will be interesting to see if Amazon gets open, social, or both, in the comments.
Granted, I'm not holding my breath.
In the light of Reg FD, a publicly traded company divulging this type of information--or misinformation as it were--to a targeted group of individuals without a more widespread "traditional" release, generally leaps to the talk of the SEC and orange jumpsuits pretty quickly.
And that will likely cause them to clam up in defense. Which only further exacerbates the situation.
It's a shame. Continuing this conversation from both sides would only improve an already exemplary piece of work.
Again, sorry you had to go through it, but the follow up story is actually better than the original "news."
Posted by: Rick Turoczy | November 15, 2007 11:31 PM
Yes, Amazon's idea doesn't seem to fly.
Posted by: Frederick | November 15, 2007 11:33 PM
It is completely obvious this was what they wanted to move along some discussions they are having with FB. They want FB to believe they have other options so they can use that leverage to negotiate a better deal. I can easily see this happening and I'm glad RRW is now of interest to these PR lackeys.
Great work Marshall, you are a class act.
Posted by: Mark | November 16, 2007 7:53 AM
you have been a good little messenger for them in the past,
so how would they know it was gonna be different this time?
i think they'll probably just take you off their advance list.
and then where will you get your "news"?
-bowerbird
Posted by: bowerbird | November 16, 2007 11:30 AM
There's a lot that can be said about this, but I will go with the simple one: there's no place for hyperbole in a public company's press releases. I'm shocked that that even got through legal - never make claims of first, unless you can back it up, especially if you're public.
That said, the whole thing just seems like a cluster. Hyperbole, draft press releases sent as embargoes ... there's a way to work in social media, and this ain't it.
But, their eReader is going to be a game changer, just like the iPhone!
Posted by: Jeremy Pepper | November 16, 2007 11:43 AM
This is fucking embarrassing. Typical chain of events at a big company like this:
1. a developer puts something simple but useful together in her spare time to demo an idea, say, RSS feeds for top sellers. Neat!
2. it gets around to enough people who think it's a cool idea that it manages to get PR sniffing around
3. PR don't actually *understand* the idea, who would want it, or why it's useful, so they are naturally fearful of it being something that might not be controllable. The words "open" and "social" are not in the language of corporate PR, so this freaks them out massively.
4. PR sends a draft press release, thinking it will be a good way to get feedback or insight.
5. Meanwhile, the idea is moving up the food chain, where fewer and fewer people really get it. In fact, it starts to sound like a kind of trivial thing, really, why is this even worth our time?
6. Suddenly, it's the deadline, and no decision's been made, so the brakes are put on while nothing much happens.
7. The idea is abandoned.
Posted by: mazonian | November 16, 2007 12:34 PM
Great article. Sorry for your troubles.
Posted by: David Mackey | November 16, 2007 5:00 PM
@ Marshall - hope your living room's still looking spiffy. What a lousy interaction - and I'm an Amazon Unbox customer.
@ Jeremy: eReader being a game-changer? I'm putting out an eBook shortly, and I don't even buy that.
@ Chris: If you use the f-word, you'll get called the f-word. Deliver value to the people you're talking to in every engagement, and you won't have to worry about terms like that.
Posted by: Adam Metz | November 17, 2007 10:29 AM
Ok, so it's a shambles, but ease off on the PR people, maybe. Those developers never make mistakes, right? Or the marketing people? Or the MD? the funders?
Someone's got to shout about your company and for the most part, PR people do it well. If they were technical and understood all the ins and outs of the systems, they'd be devs not PR and they'd be shocking at communicating. Ever seen a press release (sorry, ANYTHING) written by a developer? Dreadful...
Posted by: Mike | November 17, 2007 11:38 AM