The Chartered Institute of Public Relations has just published its draft (PDF) for consultation of its proposed code of conduct for social media. I will comment more fully once I’ve had chance to digest it.
My thought before it was published was – why do we need a separate code, we already have one for CIPR and its principles should apply to social media. We don’t have a separate code for media relations, event management, internal communications, newsletters, video or dozens of other PR channels and activities.
My first thought after reading it is probably the same. The Social media must be ethical headline should read “Public relations must be ethical” with the sub-head “and social media is no different”.
A code should be simple and should deal with issues such as honesty, integrity and competence. The CIPR’s includes confidentiality which I’m not sure about as I think it is just part of integrity, but so perhaps is honesty. If I was to promote one of the two it would be honesty.
Some of the detail in the draft does require further thought – such as ghosting. The question isn’t just is it acceptable and if so when, but also what exactly is it because there are nuances. The devil is in the detail.
UPDATE: Seems that I’m not the only one thinking along the lines of less is more. Richard Bailey talks about the Hippocratic oath and that codes shouldn’t be changing every week.
5 Replies to “CIPR social media code”
I agree: principles should be universal. It's practice that needs to change.
I spotted one devil in the detail: the suggestion that deep linking should be outlawed because some websites discourage it. I thought this battle had been fought and lost years ago – otherwise how come Google (the ultimate exploiter of deep linking) is still in business.
What is deep linking?
This is 'not get it' in spades. There is no line between Internet Mediated PR and any other form of practice.
You can't dis-invent the Internet, newspapers, ot coffee houses.
CIPR – social media consultation
The Chartered Institute of Public Relations (CIPR) has just published its consultation document on social media.
I think this might be quite a significant moment in that a few of us, including some of the previous commenters, have been wondering for some time why it is felt social media should attract a higher level of scrutiny or be deemed to require a higher degree of transparency than other forms of PR/ communications? If the social media debate forces people to think more clearly about PR as a persuasive discipline and to engage with all that that implies, so much the better.
Comments are closed.