Toby, Character Blogs & Deleted Comments

I seem to have gotten into a ruckus with Toby Bloomberg recently and the thing has been escalating. Paul Chaney over at Radiant Marketing is indignant about a comment I left on her blog and has labeled me Diva’s Enemy #1 . He was irate over a comment I left on her site in which he said I had been over-the-top, which I have to admit is accurate. It was my bad play. I'm embarrassed by it, and I apologize. I was trying something that failed because people were clueless what it was all about and that part of it shows poor judgments on my part. If I am Toby’s #1 public enemy, than she is blessed with very few enemies.  I wish her no ill will, but I do have two serious issues with her and they are not small and in those issues, I remain adamant in my disagreement with her.

These two issues are:

(1) Character blogs. Toby, as a consultant, has helped a client create Gourmet Station . She thinks they are a legitimate marketing mechanism and she is championed by two colleagues who seem to be closely intertwined in its promotion. Others thing all character blogs are lame. My views are more are complicated, and I’ll get to them in a minute.

(2) Comment Deletion. Toby apparently thinks its okay to take down comments that her Gourmet Station doesn’t like. Here, I strong disagree with her and I’ll address that as well.

First, let me back up a bit.  A central theme to our book is that traditional one-directional marketing is in the process of dying. It will be replaced by conversational marketing and companies who adapt will be better off for it—so will their constituencies. Companies who ignore the blogging phenomenon will fall behind the curve and will have a great deal of trouble catching up. Marketers who try to game blogging, using typical marketing techniques, we believe will fail because the beauty and power of blogging comes down to credible conversations between real people who listen to each other.

On April Fool’s Day, Gaping Void’s Hugh McLeod posted a new Beyond Lame Award, which pointed me to Gourmet Station. When I went there, I felt the blog merited the award.  It was slick and deceptive in my opinion.  I had no idea that this site had anything to do with Toby. I looked for a real person whom I could email—but there is no email posted that I could find.  So I posted the first of my controversial comments.  I said that Hugh sent me and that I thought he was right. The site was lame and was very interested to see how the company would answer my comment.  How they responded would impact what I planned to write about it for our book.

The next day, I received the first of two emails from Toby.  The subject line was “Agree to Disagree,” which was a reference to a bump she and I recently had on a radio program, over a very similar issue. Until I read the email, I had no idea that Toby was in any way connected to Gourmet Station and I felt badly.  Had I known, I would have just gone to her and interviewed her on the record. Toby wrote (in part), “The icon as a "voice" makes sense for the strategy and branding direction. We fully disclosed and even told part of the back story of how we reached this decision. Tris Hussey and Paul Chaney eloquently posted the on the issue. It's ok to disagree. It's how we're going to learn and grow and take this exciting adventure to the next level. My hope is that our dialogues will be based on honorable intensions that help rather than hurt and include sound research when we debate issues with each other.”

I thought it was a classy note and I felt badly.  I sent a quick awkward personal apology, I  figured I’d spend the day thinking over several options for next steps and mulling several questions it raised: for example: How does a disclosure on Radiant Marketing, justify a deceiving visitors to Gourmet Station?
For another, Toby had used the pronoun, “We.”  Were Paul Chaney and Tris Hussey involved in this project as well or just stepping up for a friend? I was going to research and get the whole story—but tabled it for the day.

Then Toby sent a second email and I perceived this one to be a hand grenade. Toby informed me that my Gourmet Station comment had been deleted. To me this went to a larger fundamental— removing legitimate comments submitted by real people seems to me to destroy the conversation that makes blogging so special. Now I was mad, and I am aware that I have a temper that has done me wrong in the past.  I followed Robert’s sage advice and I avoided writing anything on the subject, while I was still mad.

But mad I remained. I wanted to know just what rules on comments Toby maintained.  I went to her site and placed an intentionally caustic comment,which of course backfired on me. There would have been wiser courses and I regret not taking them.

Chaney and Hussey were quick to jump to their friend’s defense. Chaney posted a strong comment on Toby’s blog taking me on, telling me I was over the top and concluding: “Who asked you anyway?” He emailed me to make certain I saw it. Then he posted his own indignant blog. Interestingly, in building a case against me, he quoted Shel Holtz . He quoted Shel as saying “...a blog is a lightweight content management system that allows people to comment.”  Let me repeat, “ALLOWS PEOPLE TO COMMENT.” My point precisely. This goes to Chaney's question of who asked me anyway. 

It seems to me that when your blog has a comments section, you are asking people for comments.  Perhaps, I'm being presumptuous. At The Red Couch, there are comments that have been posted that I absolutely hate.  Yet they remain posted, so long as they do not break rules of decency or obscenity. Allan Jenkins recently pointed out a few reasonable rules that make sense to me. Some A-listers like Dave Winer—to my personal disappointment—turns off his comments but at least lets you email him. 

Toby didn’t like what I said so she arbitrarily erased my words from Gourmet Station. This did not seem to me to be a constructive next step in her e-mailed suggestion that we have dialog, “based on honorable intensions that help rather than hurt." Interestingly, she did not remove my even more caustic comments from Diva Marketing. I think this is to her credit. Perhaps she feels her clients are worthy of greater protection.  Or perhaps the decision to censor me was actually made by her clients and she was forced to be the messenger. If that is the case, Toby, I hope you find better clients.

Tris Hussey also had some curious additions to this escapade.  I was not familiar with Tris until now.  The first time I noticed his name was when it appeared under comments at Gourmet Station. Then Toby referenced in him in the email to me. Next, I read Paul Chaney gave him radiating praise in his blog. Then, finally Tris chimed in with his own posting --which shows he is no master at teaching by example. He opened with a high-road call for civility among disagreing parties. In his next breath, he referred to an “asshole VC,” who held an opposing view. Then, as a further example of a lack of civility, he pointed to my recent post on Moosetopia. That was an interesting choice. In fact, I had enjoyed a most civil interaction with Moosetopia's author John Nardini and shared with him in advance that Robert, I and many of our readers took a dim view of character blogs. He asked for the chance to be heard anyway and we gave it to him.  John sent me an email thanking me for giving him a fair chance.I feel badly that some comments posted there have been, well uncivil.  Be that as it may, that doesn’t give me the right to take them down.

Tris, please tell me what was uncivil about that. 

Toby, I apologize once more. I was rude and I was playing my own games when I should have been more straightforward. We should all remember to be straightforward--don't you think?  I would like, if it’s possible, to have that dialog filled with“ honorable intensions that help rather than hurt and include sound research when we debate issues with each other.”  I welcome any comments you wish to post.

Comments

[Paul Chaney]

I'm appreciative of Shel's willingness to apologize to Toby. She's a precious person and a top-notch consultant who only has the best of intentions where business blogging is concerned. It's to Shel's credit to admit his error.

BTW, my business is Radiant Marketing Group, not Radiant Technologies. Also, I noticed the links to my post don't work. For those of you who might wish to read what I said, here's the URL: http://radiantmarketing.typepad.com/radiant_marketing/2005/04/shel_israel_div.html

[Alex]

I'm proud to call Toby a friend and I appreciate her work and how she’s helped me, I also appreciate what you and Robert are trying to accomplish with The Red Couch project. Robert himself has done much for the Blog-O-Sphere.

I think we are seeing a natural evolution of the medium. I think of Samuel Clemens, he had a pen name, Dear Abby and many other writers’ great and small have created characters to get a feeling across. Blogging is writing. It is thoughts and feelings, it is emotion. A good Blog anyway. Part of the challenge of writing is to convey a clear feeling, that is done through structure and directness, creating a character is no different then the masks that we humans wear.

I have a Gay Blog, I routinely delete comments that are homo-phobic; I get hate email as well as people leaving comments that are relevant to gay bashing, some blatantly condemn my Blog and life. I delete them to make my readers more comfortable posting. It should be the same with any negative comment associated with tolerance. I want to make my readers as comfortable as possible so I delete.

This is a natural evolution as Blogging grows, besides, how is Gourmet Station any different from the Amateur Gourmets Blog, people enjoy food writing. Let them enjoy the feeling behind the food, after all that is great cuisine.

[Tris Hussey]

Shel,

I think you misunderstood my post...the title the the VC's post was "Assholes"...I wasn't calling him that. And I do not have an opposing view to the VC cited...I stand firmly for civility and respectful debate. Sorry for the confusion. I used his example because I thought it was telling of recent discourse.

Now that I've re-read the post, I also don't know what was uncivil in your post..there were comments to your post that were uncivil--that was my point. I'll edit the post accordingly to make that clearer. I apologize. Your conversation with John was great and well written (transcribed?).

And thank you for your decorum and respectfulness. It is a great example for us all to follow.

[shel]

Alex,
You raise a good point. In addition to Allan's rules, I think it makes perfect sense to take down any form of hate mail, along with comment spam. I also disconnect the new rapidly emerging "porn ping," which has hit both this and my other site as well.

[Jeremy C. Wright]

Shel, while I think the apology is admirable, I'm a bit unsure as to why this comment is here. It has little to do with the book, beyond your personal views on comment deletion and character blogs.

The problem with rendering a judgement on character blogs is that by the time your book comes out the outcome will already be decided. You'll be talking into the wind, in my opinion. Either they'll survive and thrive either because of natural selection or the low cost to produce them, or they'll die out either because of natural selection or because of causticity on the part of the blogosphere.

I only joined blogging a few years ago. In that time, I've seen hoopla's that have come and gone over the following items (that I can remember right now):

- advertising
- sponsored posts
- advertising mixed in with posts (a la weblogs inc)
- not having comments
- not having trackbacks
- moderating comments (which people viewed as the same as deleting them, since it stopped the free flow of speech and communication)
- fake blogs (not quite died down, but the tempest is really in a teapot, few folk actually care)
- character blogs (ditto)
- aggregated blogs (now a perfectly accepted practice, within the realms of permission, copyright, creative commons, licensing, etc)
- ads in feeds

And, I'm sure, many, many more.

I'd hate to have written this book two years ago, a year ago, etc, and written to the latest big "issue". I don't think it actually serves anyone. I'm sure you guys are highlighting the necessity for companies to form blogging strategies and, in so doing, urging them to consider the fundamentals of blogging. I really hope you don't get into character blogs.

On the flipside, comment deletion is something that does need to be gotten into. I'm dealing with it in a chapter on dealing with negativity overall in the blogosphere, but it's an important area.

Good luck getting through this. I'd really only seen your comment, and it struck me as very, very out of character (which I let Tris, Paul and Toby know about).

Have a great weekend mate :)

[shel]

Jeremy,

In fact, I debated where to post this and decided to
put it here because the book hopes to address how marketing and PR can do it right. We will discuss charactar blogs, and if we can all remain civil--maybe interview Toby, Paul and Tris for a view that's different from our own. The book will probably cover this issue in a future chapter, and we have already posted an interview with Hugh that includes Lame Blogs. In fact we consider the issue of how marketing and PR adapts to the fundamental shift among the book's key themes.

[Steven Streight aka Vaspers the Grate]

Robert, this Tris Hussey, I'm concerned about his emotional state. He seems to be in the habit of posting his little "___hole" comment wherever he can.

It's reminding me of a subtle and new form of comment spam.

I will not blemish this blog by saying anymore.

I will email you about this whole mess.

Something about this whole deal reminds me distinctly of a cult and a vicious persecution of those who disagree.

Very strange.

BLOGthenticity has been flamed and harshed just like you have been.

More, much much more, in the email coming to you in about one minute.

You'll laugh, you'll cry, you'll be enlightened.

[Elana]

I am tryng to follow this "situation" and I must say as someone who is not an insider to this bruhaha it sounds very confusing. Which I think is an important point if blogging is supposed to be a conversation with customers/audiences.
At what point can new people jump into the conversation and what else do I need to know to contribute to it.

This feels like a very private conversation at this point. And, for the new reader, it sounds like a conversation that I would have with my 16 year old daughter about the goings on in the sophmore class at Southwest High School.

I do have some opinions about Character Blogs...what's the problem? Years ago..and I mean years ago, I wrote a newsletter for Green Giant. Part of that asssignment was in each issue to create a message from the Giant. He had a very distinctive voice that the client was extremely protective of. I would write copy and the client would say... the giant wouldn't say it that way. It had to be fun, fun, fun.

Characters are usually brand symbols and are supposed to be imbued with the brand personality. If having the blog from a moose or a giant or a bunny helps the consumer gain a relationship with the company, who is anyone to say its lame marketing?

As to deleting a comment on the Gourmet Blog , I can see a good reason to do it. Comments on business blogs should focus on the topic being discussed, the product ,business issues. Not sure your opinion on the validity or credibiity of the blog itself is a relevant comment that should be included on that site.

You can write about it in your blog until the mooses come home,but it seems to be a bit off-topic to be criticizing the blog itself on their blog.(if that is what you did, I had trouble following the flow)

There are plenty of other places to do that.

elana

[Susan Getgood]

Lame is in the eye of the beholder. And blogs are just one of many ways to communicate -- with our friends and with our customers. No one of us can control how others might use this interesting communications tool, there is no single RIGHT way. In the end, the consumer of the information decides, and I truly believe that is as it should be.

Personally I have absolutely no interest in developing a character blog, I also prefer the living voices. But if people enjoy interacting with a fictional character, and the company is upfront about what it is doing, I really see nothing wrong with a fictional or character blog. In the end, the customers decide, and if the blog is funny, entertaining, engaging, to the intended customers, what's wrong with that?

I do agree about the comments -- if they are turned off, it is more like a website, not a blog -- there is no interaction there. And when a real person has a blog with comments turned off, I feel the same way -- it's not a blog that appeals to me.

Let the market decide. It will. Good stuff will persist. Bad stuff will be ignored. And companies won't keep up a blog if it isn't engaging the customers -- it is bad business to continue a marketing activity that isn't delivering results, no matter how inexpensive it appears to be.

Just my .02. YMMV.

[shel]

Elana,
Welcome to the conversation and I do regret you find it so insider and immature. Our hope is that this blog and the book are interesting to a very wide circle of people. And that is because there is a new watershed communications phenomenon just now forming. There have been some very passionate and opinionated commentary of late, and I cannot comment on that. As far as Robert and I go, we fon't OPPOSE character blogs or for that matter blogs on any subject. You and other people traditionally called "Market targets" will decide as you opt to buy--or not buy--products because of blog efforts. To date, all character blogs that we've seen look to us not to be good bets for meeting marketing goals. One or more of them may succeed wildly and that will surprise us. The magic to blogging is in the two-directional conversations between real people or so it seems to us. I will be [posting a few additional thoughts on this subject over the week end and how it might be done better. Thanks for joining in and I hope you come back soon.

[Steven Streight aka Vaspers the Grate]

As far as not being able to follow the conversation thread, this seems like the Microwave Generation Idea. We want our blogs, our site download, our Microsoft updates, our Google searches, our everything to be Fast, Fast, Fast.

It would not be that hard to read the few posts and many comments on this Fictional Character Blog controversy.

I repeat: "Authenticity. Passion. Transparency."

If you can adhere to this Universal Blog Mantra (as contrived and arbitrary as any other set of guidelines, and just as relevant and valuable as any also)...

...then wail away with all the Imaginary Critter and Ectoplasmic Ghost Blogs you want.

If you can make money, while not being deceptive or dictatorial, fine with me.

I don't write 15 second sitcom commercials with no USP (ad agency buzz term meaning "Unique Selling Proposition" from my influence, Rosser Reeves "Reality in Advertising" book 1960s era).

I don't believe in "feel good" advertising with no strong statement of product benefit.

I agree with the book title, though I have not read the book yet, "Differentiate or Die".

But be careful about those who make inept, loser marketing concepts, then try to force everyone to accept and praise, and not question, them.

I question everything. But I also think I've discovered some good answers.

I wrote a magazine ad for TroyBilt that sold One Million Dollars in tillers within 30 days. Not bragging, just stating a fact.

So I can prove that at least a few of my ideas don't stink too awfully badly.

:^)

[Elana]

Thanks for welcoming me into the conversation. It is one that I care about quite a bit. I have spent a good part of my career talking to clients about the importance of having a relationship with their customer base and taking the time to hear them.

I would also like to read the book Differentiate or Die.
I agree that blogs should have comments turned on. Isn't that the point?I wish more people wounld comment on my blog and I really don't know why they don't. I would love the conversation.

While I have deleted some porn comments, basically every thing else stays.

I do think there is a place for public and private comments.

If someone wants to critique the overall strategy or topics that I cover, then I think that I would personally prefer that in a private note. If someone has stuff to say about a particular post...then that is public.
Not sure if that makes complete sense but I think what concerned me about your comments about the Moose site or Gourmet Station is that it reminds me of my mother commenting on my hair color when I didn't ask her opinion.

If I asked, then I should be willing to hear whatever she has to say. But I don't like unsolicited critcism from my mother, and I doubt that I would appreciate it from someone who dislikes the overall concept of my blog.

Just because blogs allow you to comment, I don't think that its license to critique everything they are doing.
if I ask my mom if she likes the color of my jacket and instead she tells me she doesn't like the color of my hair, chances are I will not be happy.
If she comments on my jacket, I asked and should be willing to hear everything she had to say.

Don't get me wrong, there is a place for thoughtful criticism of blogs. I just think its more constructive on your own blog, rather than their's. PING their site and let them kmow you are chatting about them.
If you have an issue with a post , then blog away.

Thanks for listening.

[Paul Woodhouse]

At the risk of sounding melodramatic, character blogs eat away at the very core of what differentiates blogging from other forms of marketing.

As Steven mentioned previously, it's about "Authenticity. Passion. Transparency."

The current trend for character blogs is not blogging. It's using the medium of blogs to peddle an existing age-old marketing concept, but infinitely cheaper.

Let's not blur the lines here. By all means do them, but call them what they are and do not pretend that they're something they're not.

[/pd]

Content should not be touched. This is live 'linkernet'. By deleting comments, this means part of the converstation is not avialble for the community. Remember, if I see a kick ass comment, I'll diffently want to track that persons blog or email him. However, a kick ass comment to the Blogger means that s/he is being called in , which many may not like. !
Secondly, there are the comments which orginate more like hatemails between community on a single posting. I have been called a 'd-suker'- A-hole and what not when I comment. Does it get under my skin ? A times yes, becuase of the lack of courtesy. However, what happens whn such name calling is done directly to the blogger ? Are they at liberty to just delete the comments ? They should not, the transparency issue becomes opuque. !!
Thirdly, the converstaion or disccoure (on my blog) becomes a little hash where two or contenders begin a converstaion that has no relevence to the the posting. They just keep throwing comments at one another at the expense of my blog and area. I will delete such comments.

There is also at times you need to delete comments from an entry which unknowly may comprimise the party. Like they assumed that comments were only viewable by me, and had left their cell number to call me back. So I did with a request that should this comments be deleted ? as its visable on the web. He immeditaly wanted it removed.

So there are the various scenarios on why comments should be deleted and WHY IT SHOULD not be deleted. I am leaning towards the latter, as this supports community fingering and gives transprancey !!

[Shel Holtz]

Shel, responding only to your comment about Dave Winer turning off comments on Scripting News. In one of his "Online Journalism Review" columns, Mark Glaser wrote:

"More recently, the godfather of blogging Dave Winer, former CEO of UserLand, told me that comments are not an intrinsic part of a Weblog and have basically failed after a brief honeymoon period in the early history of blogs. 'I think a blog is a publication, and publications have proven that letters to the editor are useful,' Winer said. 'But blogs with comments are not letters to the editor. Letters to the editor are edited, they're selected, and that selection process is a very important aspect of it.'

"Instead, Winer thinks commenters should simply run their own blog if they want to comment."

I'm not agreeting or disagreeing -- just pointing it out as a point of interest, FWIW. The whole Glaser piece:

http://www.ojr.org/ojr/glaser/1095201311.php

[shel]

Shel
(No, I'm not talking to myself. I hate to disagree with an authentic guru, and my partner's mentor, but in this case I must on two counts: (1)If blogs are publications, then they must be two-way publications, or they end up no better than those that have preceded them. If the only way to respond is to start your own blog, then a majority of people will simply be shout down. A majority of the world will never blog or so it seems to me--but they will visit and giving them a comment voice is a more powerful tool than a letter to an editor. I have had my letter to an editor edited and cleansed--and the editor destroyed the central point I was making. (2) I agree more with Dan Gillmor. Our readers are making Robert and I smarter and they are helping us write a better book. Dave may simply be less interested in what people have to say to him, than he is in what he has to say to them. At least that's the impression I'm left with.

[shel]

One more though on Comments. At least Dave Winer made a policy of taking down ALL comments. Toby made the arbitrary decision of taking down just my comment on Gourmet Station. This was arbitrary indeed.

[Shel Holtz]

I broadly agree with you, Shel (also not talking to myself); as I said, just a point of interest since you raised Winer in your original post. I believe there will be applications of blogs in which comments are unnecessary (blogs used to write novels, blogs used for parody soap operas), but those designed to stimulate an interaction require comments.

I also believe that a comment policy, strictly adhered to, resolves many of these issues. GM Fastlane has removed comments that were patently offensive. There have been very few, but they indicated from the beginning that they wouldn't tolerate posts that were profane. Ultimately, it's your blog and you can do what you want with it, but your credibility will certainly be compromised if you are arbitrary in the removal of comments just because you don't like them.

[shel]

Shel Holtz--Funny, we have an interview out to Bob Lutz right now, but he's been slow getting back to us for reasons that are obvious if you read the papers. There's enormous credibility tht he let people talk to him. One of his team tells me, that they actually make hardcopy of the comments for Lutz, who reads it when he's on planes and moving about. So, Lutz reads every comment. Since each posting averages over 100 comments, I don't think anybody expects Lutz to personally answer each. But GM makes it clear that he is listening. It seems to me that if Lutz can learn by listening, maybe Winer could too.

[Robert Scoble]

Dave Winer listens to what people say a lot and certainly links to enough people to show that he reads quite voraciously.

He told me that he doesn't want to have comments anymore because he wants people to comment about him ON THEIR OWN BLOGS.

That makes sense to me. After all, he's evangelizing blogging and RSS and by doing that he certainly got more than a few of us to start blogging. If not simply to tell the world that we disagree with him.

[Robert Scoble]

Also, are comments really necessary in a world where I can stick the URL of this blog post in Technorati and see everyone who has commented on this blog post?

[Alex]

Yes, comments are needed, because not everyone has a Blog. Or people have different formats for the Blog.

[Steven Streight aka Vaspers the Grate]

I turned comments off on all my blogs, temporarily, due to an unprecedented comment spam storm.

I ask readers to email their comments to me, until the storm dies down.

I may start a moderation, delayed posting, captcha type thing.

As far as deleing posts you disagree with, this is cultish and paranoid and immature behavior, I don't care who does it.

If the comment is spam, pornographic, racist, sexist, I agree to delete it. But just because it is contrarian or argumentative, this is a sign of a dictatorial, anti-free speech, frightened reaction.

Sad to see formerly rational people lose their marbles in this manner. Oh well, let's have compassion on them and hope they ditch their bad influences and come to their senses.