CNET is mandating that its blogging journalists respond to all reader comments and questions, according to a report in The Guardian. Further, they are also expected to get involved in every debate that "has legs." (Hat tip to Cyberjournalist)
This model is incredibly noble and indicative of where journalism needs to evolve. However, at the same time, it presents a conundrum for public relations professionals and the journalists as well.
For every three or four stories that the PR community "generates" there's often one that the client is not happy with the turnout. Sometimes it's a misquote. Other times it's a negative tone. Now not all of these gripes are rational of course. However, often they are.
When the offending story and/or error rises to a certain level of concern, the natural next step is to contact the reporter or even his/her editor. This happens hundreds of times a day in newsrooms across the country. The editorial team then makes a decision to amend a story and/or print a correction if it's a print publication - or not. This all takes place in the backchannel, not out on the ice.
Now the game has changed, at least on CNET's web site. If there's an error in a blog a PR professional can post comments and questions. That's not new. However, what is new is that the reporters must respond. Also, why stop at blog posts? CNET allows readers to comment on news stories too. They should go all the way here.
Unfortunately, I also worry that this will be used unethically. It's possible that less than scrupulous PR people will solicit "friendlies" to post questions and concerns in an effort to stir up a debate. This is basically astroturfing.
Again, it's great that CNET will respond to its readers. However, they would be advised to make this process more transparent so we know what they will and won't respond to. Further, some clarity on how PR professionals and corporations should interact with journalists in comments would be helpful too.
