Ethics With Blogs: Jeff Jarvis
Be honest
Stern, Stewart, Colbert, and bloggers everywhere say what they think.
In them, we hear the language of the internet age: honest, direct, blunt, to the point, no bullshit, few apologies. "Their [One may shock old, controlled sensibilities. But complaining about it, rsk-rsking it, trying to clean it up, or trying to ignore it won't work. "The post-media generation raised on honesty and directness expects truth and bluntness from others. With Google, it is harder to hide behind spin, to control information, or to hope that people will forget what you said yesterday or the mistakes
you make today. The truth is a click away.
Institutions are learning to acknowledge their mistakes and apologize.
When he took office following predecessor Eliot Spitzer's sex scandal, New York Governor David Paterson preemptively admitted having an affair, among other peccadilloes. Apple had a near-disaster in the launch of its Mobile.me service and Steve Jobs admitted it publicly. This is honest talk, which comes in a human voice. Even in the machine age-the Google age-that voice will emerge and succeed over a filtered, packaged, institutional tone. The Cluetrain Manifesto (which you can read for free at Cluecrain.org) teaches this lesson in its 95 theses, which begin:
1. Markets are conversations.
2. Markets consist of human beings, not demographic sectors.
3. Conversations among human beings sound human. They are conducted in a human voice.
4. Whether delivering information, opinions, perspectives, dissenting arguments, or humorous asides, the human voice is typically open, natural, unconrrived.
5. People recognize each other as such from the sound of this voice.
6. The internet is enabling conversations among human beings that were simply not possible in the era of mass media.
In every interaction you have with your constituents, speak with a human voice as if you were speaking face-to-face. Be boldly, bluntly honest when admitting your mistakes-and when disagreeing with the public. Lock your PR people away. And remember, everything you say is searchable. 'think of Google as the angel on your shoulder keeping you honest.
Be transparent
My life is an open blog. On the "about" page on my site, I try to practice what I preach about transparency. I reveal my business relationships: the companies for which I work, write, speak, and consult. 1 reveal personal relationships: companies where I used to work, where I have friends, and even where I have been turned down for jobs. I list stocks I own. T sometimes write about religion, so I reveal mine. As I often write about politics, I reveal my views and-to the horror of traditional journalists-my votes. This page is my defense against an accusation that I might try to hide at: filiations, opinions, or conflicts of interest. At the end of this book, I will also make relevant disclosures.
I'll throw out this challenge to you in your organization: Why keep secrets? Or why keep more secrets than you have to? I've heard the argument:. Your competitors will steal good ideas. But transparency will build a relationship of trust with your constituents and open up new opportunities. The ethic of transparency sums up much of what has come before in this book: the need to involve your constituents in your process, the need to hand over control through openness and information, the benefits of open-source networks, the benefits of the gift economy, the ability to listen.
But I must acknowledge the irony of advocating transparency in a book about Google, which in many ways is as opaque and secretive as Dick Cheney, You can't get into a Google office without signing a nondisclosure agreement. Google won't reveal details of its revenue split with sites that run its ads. It refuses to list its Google News sources. It won't tell us how many servers it has. It chooses not to use open-source software for some functions, like managing its cloud of computers, so it can retain a proprietary advantage.
Still, as we've just discussed, Google does develop most of its products in public by releasing unfinished versions and getting help from users. In that sense, it is unusually transparent, willing to work in the open and involve it's users in development. I suggest you follow Google's example in it's product development and ignore its silence and opaqueness elsewhere.
Stern, Stewart, Colbert, and bloggers everywhere say what they think.
In them, we hear the language of the internet age: honest, direct, blunt, to the point, no bullshit, few apologies. "Their [One may shock old, controlled sensibilities. But complaining about it, rsk-rsking it, trying to clean it up, or trying to ignore it won't work. "The post-media generation raised on honesty and directness expects truth and bluntness from others. With Google, it is harder to hide behind spin, to control information, or to hope that people will forget what you said yesterday or the mistakes
you make today. The truth is a click away.
Institutions are learning to acknowledge their mistakes and apologize.
When he took office following predecessor Eliot Spitzer's sex scandal, New York Governor David Paterson preemptively admitted having an affair, among other peccadilloes. Apple had a near-disaster in the launch of its Mobile.me service and Steve Jobs admitted it publicly. This is honest talk, which comes in a human voice. Even in the machine age-the Google age-that voice will emerge and succeed over a filtered, packaged, institutional tone. The Cluetrain Manifesto (which you can read for free at Cluecrain.org) teaches this lesson in its 95 theses, which begin:
1. Markets are conversations.
2. Markets consist of human beings, not demographic sectors.
3. Conversations among human beings sound human. They are conducted in a human voice.
4. Whether delivering information, opinions, perspectives, dissenting arguments, or humorous asides, the human voice is typically open, natural, unconrrived.
5. People recognize each other as such from the sound of this voice.
6. The internet is enabling conversations among human beings that were simply not possible in the era of mass media.
In every interaction you have with your constituents, speak with a human voice as if you were speaking face-to-face. Be boldly, bluntly honest when admitting your mistakes-and when disagreeing with the public. Lock your PR people away. And remember, everything you say is searchable. 'think of Google as the angel on your shoulder keeping you honest.
Be transparent
My life is an open blog. On the "about" page on my site, I try to practice what I preach about transparency. I reveal my business relationships: the companies for which I work, write, speak, and consult. 1 reveal personal relationships: companies where I used to work, where I have friends, and even where I have been turned down for jobs. I list stocks I own. T sometimes write about religion, so I reveal mine. As I often write about politics, I reveal my views and-to the horror of traditional journalists-my votes. This page is my defense against an accusation that I might try to hide at: filiations, opinions, or conflicts of interest. At the end of this book, I will also make relevant disclosures.
I'll throw out this challenge to you in your organization: Why keep secrets? Or why keep more secrets than you have to? I've heard the argument:. Your competitors will steal good ideas. But transparency will build a relationship of trust with your constituents and open up new opportunities. The ethic of transparency sums up much of what has come before in this book: the need to involve your constituents in your process, the need to hand over control through openness and information, the benefits of open-source networks, the benefits of the gift economy, the ability to listen.
But I must acknowledge the irony of advocating transparency in a book about Google, which in many ways is as opaque and secretive as Dick Cheney, You can't get into a Google office without signing a nondisclosure agreement. Google won't reveal details of its revenue split with sites that run its ads. It refuses to list its Google News sources. It won't tell us how many servers it has. It chooses not to use open-source software for some functions, like managing its cloud of computers, so it can retain a proprietary advantage.
Still, as we've just discussed, Google does develop most of its products in public by releasing unfinished versions and getting help from users. In that sense, it is unusually transparent, willing to work in the open and involve it's users in development. I suggest you follow Google's example in it's product development and ignore its silence and opaqueness elsewhere.