Yesterday I offered a little personal tome about voting. I felt awkward posting it since this blog is not about politics, nor my personal opinion. Yes, my feelings on certain issues percolate from time to time here, but you don’t read this blog for Jason’s personal world view. This blog is about social media, public relations, marketing and communications. My opinions on those topics is fair game. But how far outside that realm is acceptable?
The majesty of blogging is that it is what you make it. While it is clear this website serves as a conduit for people interested in working with me or Kat through our agency, Doe-Anderson, it is my blog, a personal possession, that I can use however I like. Straying off the beaten path is my decision to make. I only risk losing readers (or possibly gaining others) if I do that.
But strategically, it’s not always smart to do that. And the closer you get to a targeted, business-oriented blog, the more important it is to remember that there’s a time and place for your personal views and the blog often isn’t one of them.
Before posting yesterday’s tome, I polled my Twitter followers on the topic, expressing no desire to start a personal blog for such instances when I just want to offer up something off topic, and asking if they thought it was okay to divert from what the audience comes for on occasion. Here’s what they said:
Clearly, it seems okay to write what I wrote yesterday, so long as I stick to social media topics most of the time. But where is the limit? Who draws the line?
Then consider the problem with a brand or corporate blog. Part of the reason consumers aren’t as attracted to them is they are two stale, predictable and safe. Companies, CEOs and brand managers play the safe route. Taking a stand normally means 50 percent of the people hate you. God forbid!
But isn’t that what makes a company interesting? Engaging? Human?
What if you stumbled across a corporate blog yesterday where the CEO or Chief Marketing Officer or some other blogger for the company took a stand, picked a candidate to endorse and listed the reason’s why? Wouldn’t it make you more interested in that company? Sure, it would upset some brand enthusiasts and loyalists, not to mention some people inside the company, but most businesses can be held up to the political litmus test and prove that one side or the other winning is more beneficial for the company. Why not state the case and explain why?
If Bob Lutz blogged yesterday that General Motors benefits from a McCain victory because the Republican agenda is tougher on foreign trade and labor unions than the Democrats, the automotive industry would be on fire today. It’s not wrong for someone to take a stand. Why is it wrong for a company to do so?
I’ve offered the advice here before that to be successful in brand building, and in blogging, you have to be bold. That is true for companies as it is for individuals.
How will your company be bold today?
VIP Explorers Club
- A Guide to Building the Best Possible Facebook Custom Audience with Jon Loomer
- How Marketing Will Change at the Incite Marketing Summit
- Book Review: ‘The CMO’s Periodic Table’ Reveals the True Elements of Marketing
- How to Use Reddit to Drive Traffic to Your Site
- Trump Launches National Snapchat Filter and Millennials Are Furious