On ethics, social media and good manners

If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to my RSS feed. You can even subscribe by email! Thanks for visiting!

I have long maintained that there are four main ethical rules / guidelines that underpin ‘Social Media/Web2.0′, what I refer to in my workshops and lectures as ‘The 3Ts and an A’ (an oblique reference to Little T & A, a wonderful Rolling Stones song about… well, you will have to listen to it and decide for yourself):

• Trust
• Transparency
• Truth
• Accountability

Those of us who have inhabited the ‘Business Communication / PR/ Marcomms’ space of the blogosphere for a while have long pondered and quietly discussed the reasons why Messrs Hobson and Holtz decided to leave the Second Life-focused agency crayon.

Neither of them gave any real reason, although many of us wondered if it was the (allegedly) strong focus on profitability brought to the company by (now ex-) CEO Gary Cohen. Rumours were rife around the water cooler, which neither Shel or Neville chose to deny or confirm.

Now Toby Bloomberg and Geoff Livingston have combined (considerable) forces to denounce an op-ed article by someone who should know better (Ad Age executive dire-rectum Jonah Bloom) about crayon and it’s recent tumble from grace.

Let’s be clear about this: crayon has lost not only its key early players (Hobson and Holtz — the quite justifiably ‘uber-mentors’ of the Social Media world from a Business/PR/Marcomms perspective) but also seriously brilliant ‘Social Mediarists’ such as C.C. Chapman.

To lose H&H is a mistake; to lose C.C. alongside them is a major catastrophe, I would think.

For those not au fait with the history of crayon, let me explain it from this antipodean’s eyes: crayon was launched amidst much hoopla (indeed, the hoopla caused a bit of a ’stir’ amongst the Second Life population, but let us move on) — they were (amongst) the first PR/Marcomm agencies to focus a considerable amount of their energies on Second Life. Indeed, the agency itself was created for such a purpose.

I am not telling tales out of school when I recall several conversations with Paull Young, prior to his departure from Australia on his world tour, about crayon and how he was hoping to be recruited as one of them; I too was hoping for a ‘tap on the shoulder’ from one of the ‘crayonistas’, but was far too proud to beg for it (I was waiting by my inbox everyday to be invited to be the Aussie arm of the crayon empire).

Alas, I never got the invitation email, and Paull never got the invite either — but he nevertheless scored a hugely-envied and thoroughly well-deserved ‘embrace’ from the very savvy and wise Converseon, who not only recruited Paull but, before even Paull, Constantin Basturea, the Social Mediarist to whom so many of us around the PR world owe a massive debt of thanks to for his thankless and tireless efforts to chart and map the developing Social Media world from a PR perspective.

But back to the story…

crayon has lost a considerable number of its ‘leading lights’ as it struggles to make its way from potentially fantastic idea to business reality. As Joe Jaffe (founder and chief recruiter) himself says in an apologetic post, he “miscalculated how long a lag there can be between pitching, winning an assignment, and getting the first payment in.”

No doubt this is why many of the ‘leading lights’ decided to ‘move on’.

But the silence from Hobson and Holtz, in particular, is deafening. I cannot criticise them; they are, after all, my friends and colleagues, and Shel in particular has been ‘above and beyond’ in his friendship, support and mentoring (whether he recognises it or not).

Which is where the title of this post comes in.

There are ‘ground rules’ for the behaviour of us all within this new communications paradigm. Ground rules such as ‘trust’, ‘truth’, ‘transparency’ and ‘accountability’.

But there also needs to be an acknowledgement of the basic human rights of privacy and the display of good manners. I believe that far above the rights of the masses to the ‘3Ts and an A’ are the rights of the individual to privacy, good taste and manners.

Should Shel and Neville choose to share with us all the reasons why they parted ways with the company they ‘trumpeted loud and long’, and were so instrumental in creating aspirational longing for in so many of us, then good on them.

But equally, should they prefer to stay silent about it all, then so be it too. Thereby marks the signs of ‘gentlemanly good manners’, which we should all respect. As Sir Ken Robinson says so eloquently, if we are not prepared to fail, then we are never destined to create something of worth.

My highest admiration and strongest fraternal feelings for Sheville don’t change — but my curiosity, never to be sated except perhaps in private conversation, will continue nonetheless.

Currently listening to: Brian Eno - On Land - Dunwich Beach, Autumn, 1960

Tagged as: ethics