1) Change “Social Media” to Media
It’s like we’re a separate entity from the rest of the so-called “mainstream” journalists, filmmakers, photographers, etc.
The fact is that everyone who is contributing to the dialogue – be it in video, text or photos – has earned the right to be called media. Let’s can the compartmentalization and recognize once and for all the world has changed. We are all media – period.
I wonder what Jeremiah thinks?
2) Change Press Release to “Social Media Press Release”:
On the other hand, publicists on this side of the country, ignited a furore over the “Social Media Press Release”, apparently linking the much maligned press release for eternity with social media. Shel Holtz — one of the panelists at, the event that started it all, vents his frustrations on his blog:
How can journalists know that what they’re reading is credible, trustworthy information coming directly from the source? To date, reporters have known this because the information was sent through a reputable wire service; the credibility was built in.
Ensuring that people who need the information get it when it’s released, and that they can readily identify it as credible and authoritative, are additional goals of the effort to establish standards for a social media release.
So what exactly is Social Media?
Solution 1: By that definition, social media should NOT be called media, since it’s inaccurate (NBC is not creating media to share their opinions w/ you, nor are they interested in receving your opinion; it’s “them to us”, not “us to us” principle).
Solution 2: By the same definition, Press Releases should NOT be labeled Social Media press releases, since it’s AGAIN, not from “us to us”, rather its from “them to us”.
Do you beg to differ? Feel free to voice your opinion.
For more on the “us to us” vs. “them to us” concepts, check out my post on Drucker and marcom.
Also, here are Mack’s thoughts on the “Kill Social Media” post.