Rich Karpinski just wrote an article that’s featured on the front page of BtoB. The information in the article is basic. It’s not groundbreaking. It’s about a trend that, if you’re reading this blog, then you’re already familiar with. It’s about how businesses are now embracing blogging.

Karpinski points out how only aroudn 12% of Fortune 500 companies run corporate blogs. But he gives key examples of how companies such as Dell, Kodak, Intel, SAP, and IBM run coporate blogs.

The reason articles such as this can be important is because it is located in a targeted business publication. It’s readers, many of whom are at he very least involved in corporate markting at some sort of senior level, need to be exposed to more articles such as this. Larger publications such as Business Week feature similar articles that carry influence.

The more exposure senior managers - be they in marketing or technology or finance - get exposed to blogging and, more importantly overall, social media as a business cultural paradigm, then the more likely they are finally going to “get it”.

Articles such as these are a form of professional-word-of-mouth. Many of the decision makers - those that are in the 88% of the Fortune 500 that don’t have corporate blogs aren’t going to be reading social media marketing blogs. Many of them haven’t heard of Todd And’s PowerList or the Age of Conversation or ooVoo. They’re not on Twitter. They don’t care about any of that. And there’s enough of them out there that that’s fine…for now.

So that’s why wee need more basic articles like Rick Karpinski’s.

Apparently 48% of bloggers think that’s a good idea. That’s according to the bloggers who agreed with the statement directed to PR execs “It is okay to compensate bloggers for writing about my clients, but it is not of to me to tell them to disclose the payment” as interviewed by APCO Worldwide and the Council of PR Firms. The forty-wight percent may ot be a majority, but it is a plurality. Sixteen percent had either a neutral or no opinion on the matter. That means 36% percent had problems with the idea of bloggers getting pay for play.

PR people were against he idea of paying bloggers by a whopping 96% - 4%. That’s the camp I fall into.

The Pay Per Post model is controversial, but it’s transparent. I’m not much for paying bloggers period, but transparency is of full importance. What we have here is potentially a serious stumbling block. We view bloggers to be, in part, journalists who cover certain issue areas and are therefore the ones we’re going to target. Yet they see their blogs as their personal domain, one that they had never expected to get pitched about - but perhaps secretly wanted to earn money from.

Many bloggers have little idea of what constitutes journalistic integrity, but nevertheless maintain a sense of pride in what they produce. This can translate into them not wanting to be a shrill or a marketing piece for a product or service without some form of payment. To PR people, that seems wholly counterintuitive.

The problem is that there are no established groundrules between the PR industry and bloggers. The PR industry as a whole has its own standard while each blogger has his or her own standards. And generally we have to follow the bloggers lead - or move onto the next blogger.

APCO Worldwide and the Council of Public Relations Firms just released a study on the similarities and differences on how public relations executives and bloggers view blogger relations. It confirms common sense, but it also shows me that common sense is not always applied.

The first thing that jumps out to me is that 52% of PR execs think that they and/or their firms do a good job reaching out to bloggers, while 65% of blogger felt otherwise. That means that, essentially, two-thirds of bloggers believe that PR efforts are poor.

This is important for what it says and for what it doesn’t say.

First of all, it means to me that we, as an industry are at least partially failing to effectively create best practices. There are probably too many haphazard efforts that are designed for mass exposure - meaning no effective targeting. And pitches may often empty of any relevance or filled with a false sense of camaraderie. And this probably occurs because a firm gets a client and off they go promoting.

In defense of agencies, however, it’s hard to see how it often could be that much different at times. While I agree PR practitioners should familiarize themselves with a blogger’s subject matter and style, it is impossible to do it on such a large scale. There are no Bacon’s or Cision’s media guide to work off. And clients often want results fast.

This is not to excuse the practice. It means that we in the profession must constantly seek to create methodologies that work for both the client and the blogger. I also see a potential business opportunity here for online directories to enhance their listings and perhaps charge a fee for a higher level of service.

Nevertheless, that gap is too large and the 65% of dissatisfied bloggers is abhorrently high. This brings me to a second point because the study points out that 63% of the bloggers surveyed that they get pitched at least once per week, 42% get pitched once per day, and 27% get pitched more than once per day. I talked to Matt Shaw, the Vice President of the Council of Public Relations Firms to clarify who these bloggers are. Essentially, they were approximately 400 “top” bloggers who responded to their survey.

Now we’re talking. Because it’s those A-List bloggers who are key here. Because they have the ability to make or break this whole blogger relations phenomenon. They’re the ones that are going to be getting pitched to more often - often as we see as being more than once a day.

Part of the problem is seen in the further findings by the study. Only 36% of PR execs agreed with the statement that “Bloggers are journalists and should be treated as such”, yet 62% of these execs nevertheless agreed with the statement “PR firms should reach out to bloggers essentially the same way we do to traditional media.”

This shows me two things. One is that the ways we reach out to traditional media are entirely adequate as methods that can be transferred to reaching out to bloggers. And/or it could mean that PR execs have yet to come to terms as to what the hell bloggers really are in the first place.

I suspect it’s both. Often, an honest respectful engagement can win over a reporter as it can a blogger. But sometimes it can’t . Bloggers themselves often don’t have any standards. They got into blogging and had no idea that they would soon get pitched on an almost daily basis. And what at first may have been flattering has now become annoying.

More on this study to follow…

I’ll be taking a look at Southwest’s overall response to the report that they had been flying “unairworthy” planes. This controversy relates to missed or overlooked inspections, small or tiny cracks, a thumbs up by a FAA inspector, and a short period of continued flying violations after the problem was identified.

As usual, in cases like this, the story is hard to follow. That always seems to create initial hysteria and then allows to potential offending party to spin the story to their benefit, often leaving out key concepts.

It seems that in 2004, the FAA issued a ruling that all 737 airplanes must be inspected every 4,500 flights. These inspections were primarily concerned about cracking, a condition which that can lead to very dangerous situations.

On March 15, 2007, Southwest let the FAA that it may have allowed 46 planes to exceed that number of flights as decided by the FAA. Southwest then did and internal investigation and found that, yes, those 46 planes did indeed exceed that limit by a total of 59.791 flights. They reported back this information to the FAA on March 19. However, after disclosing this information to the FAA, they continued to fly those planes for four more days to March 23 for an additional 1,451 flights.

At some point within that March 15-23 time period, an FAA official gave Southwest the thumbs up to continue to fly the planes as long as they were quickly inspected. That official, now being disciplined, is supposedly based out of Dallas, which coincidentally, is where Southwest Airlines is headquartered.

For this transgression, the FAA is proposing a $10.2 million fine.

That’s the story as I see it so far. I’ll be examinging their response as time goes on.

Next, I’ll be taking a look at the way they’re corresponding through their blog.

That’s the story as I see it so far.

I just asked a question via Twitter. And I’ll repeat it here.

Question for social media types…many complain about interference from legal dept. when it comes to social media, especially with UGC…so, are there any conferences, events, seminars, etc. that bring the two groups together to understand one another more?

Not to toot my own horn, but that’s a good question. And it’s one that needs to be answered.

Marketers are essentially in charge of defining, promoting, enhancing, and protecting the brand. Lawyers are essentially in charge of protecting the entity, the business, and, yes, the brand.

I got to thinking about this because social media strategists often, as part of their strategy, enlist, encourage, or allow a brands users to play a role in the branding. I got to thinking of a recent story involving a group of car enthusiasts putting together a picture calendar showing off their cars. They calendars were to be sold on CafePress. But there was some sort of communication screw up and it was halted I believe. Some social media strategists mistakenly blamed the car company.

But then I thought…wait…if the legal department did have reservations in this situation, is that necessarily a bad thing? Think about it….

What if one of the participants of an unsolicited consumer generated media effort has let’s say a problem. Like a police record. I mean, let’s say he’s the type of guy who could get nailed by Chris Hansen of Nightline. You know, a pedophile.

Ridiculous? If you think so, you’re missing the point. The point is that legal department and marketing departments are going to have to understand one another and work together to both reasonably promote and protect the brand through social media. Cutting edge vs. overly cautious won’t do. Lawyer potentially nixing or at least getting in the way of potentially effective programs or frustrated marketing types angrily rolling their eyes at the stupidity and interference of the legal department will only serve to stifle the brand, or, potentially worse, leave it unprotected.