I guess the bottom line for me is that this is a business blog, not a personal one. By it’s very nature it is designed to promote, just as almost every other activity within my business life is designed to help grow my business. That is the point. How we go about it is what matters; a little integrity and practicing The Golden Rule goes far in ensuring that my more atavistic urges are tamped down in favor of a type of social egalitarianism that is a win/win for all. That seems to be a good strategy whether we’re discussing social media, conferences, webinars, client meetings, etc..

True objectivity is, I think, impossible. I don’t see anything wrong with using company or personal blogs to promote – whether it’s EFFECTIVE is quite another matter.

Blogs like this, or RW Connect, or Research Live, etc. are slightly different. Promotion is more of a vice on multi-author blogs, at worst it wastes peoples’ time and pollutes the resource. But I notice nobody is mentioning the magic word “editor”! Like any journalist, it’s my responsibility to make sure my copy is on-time and ready to publish without editing (which in this case means “not just a PR job”), but there are editorial checks on overly promotional pieces, at the commissioning stage and at the publication stage.

So if we think promotionalism IS a problem it’s partly up to Lenny, Brian Tarran, the ESOMAR editors, conference committees etc to assert editorial authority to help deal with it. (I think they do, by the way). With conferences there’s a slightly different problem, which is that the current fashion is to book as many client-agency two-hander case study presentations as possible, but these are almost invariably promotional and harder for the committee to police. But this is another issue really.

Since you asked… I take slightly different approaches depending on where I’m writing/speaking. The bedrock approach – 1) attribute properly, 2) don’t be a dick – hopefully doesn’t shift!

On my own blog the principle has always been to write posts I’d want to read (and share, comment on etc.) if I came across them written by someone else. I treat guest posts on other people’s blogs similarly.

On the company blog the idea is to post genuinely interesting stuff I’ve found elsewhere online, and link it to the kind of things we’re thinking about.

If I’m reporting on a conference session I’m trying to pull out the key points but also synthesise the session (or conference as a whole) thematically – point by point accounts are done better by live bloggers.

If I’m speaking I always try to present something new – not always possible but it often is.

Everything else goes on Twitter, where I suppose I’m unusual among (relatively) widely followed researchers in that at least half my followers aren’t interested in research. So when I post research links I try and post things which will have some level of general interest. I’m also likelier to let my own personal or political views bleed through on Twitter.

It’s always a questions, isn’t it – to say or not to say, how much to say and when…..With the aspect (issue?) of Personal brands growing alongside corporate/association/group brands, it is always a delicate balance.

Ray – does a Swiss-approach work most times?