Weighing in on the ghost-blogging debate

Share This!

I’ve been pondering the “ghost-blogging” debate for some time, listening (via podcasts) and reading (via blogs) the growing chorus of voices that proclaims ghost-blogging an acceptable and legitimate practice. People I respect are among those who argue…

• A good ghost writer can convey the intent and the personality of his or her subject.
• The best analogy for good ghost blogging is signing for the deaf, which transmits the exact words and inflection of the speaker deaf members of the audience cannot hear.
• Ghost writing is common in business and blogs are just another business communication tool; so what’s the beef with ghost blogging? It’s inevitable that a business communication tool will be used the same way other business communication tools are used.
• Ghost blogging and authenticity are not mutually exclusive concepts.

Sallie Goetsch (rhymes with sketch) is one of the most articulate advocates of ghost blogging, but I have also heard from Topaz Partners via the firm’s blog (in response to a Bryan Person post), and from Mitch Joel through his blog (twice) and podcast, and from my FIR co-host Neville Hobson through the episode he hosted, in my absence, with Sallie. Adam Zand has weighed in, as have Dan York, Terry Fallis and David Jones (of the excellent Inside PR podcast), the list goes on.

The authenticity argument

While I consider myself the leading advocate of the “it depends” school of thought (which applies to just about anything), the instances of ghost blogging that I would find acceptable are vastly outweighed by those I don’t. With no disrespect to my colleagues, I generally don’t buy the argument.

My problem is simple: Blogs aren’t just another business communication channel. In fact, blogs were created and popularized by people who were fed up with traditional business communication channels. They had had enough of fabricated quotes in press releases and speeches read by executives but written by professional speech writers. These people wanted authentic conversations with real human beings. A ghost-written executive blog is the opposite of what blogs were created for; it is counterintuitive to the 10th tenet of Christopher Carfi’s Social Customer Manifesto: “I want to do business with companies that act in a transparent and ethical manner.”

I’ve heard the argument that a really good ghost writer can be authentic, that he or she can get into the CEO’s head and learn how he thinks as well as how he speaks, then convey that style when writing his blog post for him. That argument runs counter to the very definition (according to the American Heritage Dictionary) of “authentic,” however: “Having a claimed and verifiable origin or authorship.” So, how can a ghost-written blog be authentic when it’s not authored by the person whose name appears on it? It can’t.

The “it depends” question, then, is whether a blog needs to be authentic at all. It depends on what the blog is being used for. Blogs can be defined as the content management software that produces web content. Do I care who writes McDonalds’ blog about corporate social responsibility? Not at all—it’s the voice of McDonalds that counts, not a specific author. The same is true of Cisco Systems’ blog about technology policy matters.

But a blog by an identified senior executive is different. By blogging, the executive is specifically saying, “This is me engaged in a conversation with you.” While everyone knows that the quotes in the press release are fabricated, and that the speech was penned by a speechwriter, there is an expectation when someone reads and comments on Jonathan Schwartz’s blog that he’s engaged directly with Sun Microsystem’s CEO, not some anonymous proxy. When people learn that somebody other than the CEO is the blog’s true author, it will serve only to deepen the distrust and cynicism that characterizes most peoples’ existing perceptions of business.

Rules vs. expectations

Much of the conversation about ghost-blogging has been about “rules” and the notion that rules change. It’s the wrong point. This isn’t about rules, because there are none. It’s about expectations. It’s about perceptions. Ultimately, then, it’s about reputation. It doesn’t matter how noble an executive’s intentions were or how brilliantly the ghost blogger captures the executive’s intent and personality. From the public’s point of view, the unmasking of an executive who isn’t writing the blog he claims he’s writing—the one with his by-line on it—would be no different than the revelation that a pro-WalMart blog was really penned by a public relations agency (regardless of how authentic that blog sounded thanks to brilliant writing).

It disturbs me that we can so easily dismiss the notion of blogging as genuine communication between real people by suggesting that rules change and blogs can be turned into business communication tools no different than the ghost-written CEO columns that appear on the inside front covers of employee magazines. If that’s what a business leader wants, why bother to present it through a blog unless there is an intent to deceive? Why not simply stick with a leader column?

What this argument is really about, ultimately, is opportunity. Business has the opportunity to engage in a real conversation, real collaboration—and win hugely (as the outstanding book “Wikinomics” suggests). Alternatively, business can blow the opportunity by reinventing blogs in the image of any other communication tool until we can’t tell the difference between a blog post and a press release.

Lost causes are the ones worth fighting for

The trend toward ghost blogging won’t stop, of course. I agree entirely with Dan York that many business leaders will turn their blogs over to others. Some may actually do a good job (I have no doubt that Sallie’s work is excellent). Most will not, though, because the world is full of people who look for a quick and easy answer, and the result will confirm Scott Adams’ bitingly cynical view of the issue (which Dan York also ran in his post):

And thus, the ever-expanding blog-reading public will perceive that the business world has perverted a channel of communication that was created in order to foster genuine conversation. (Speeches, press releases, and annual reports were not.) The business world has the opportunity to employ blogs to create human touch points in their organizations. Like Dan, I hope the truly authentic blogs that fulfill this vision will rise to the top. But for most people, business is business, and the inauthentic blogs will taint the rest. If the CEO isn’t writing his own blog, how can I believe anybody else in the organization is?

In a (non-existent) ideal world, CEOs who want to engage in the conversation but who aren’t willing to put their own pen to paper will opt for alternatives; God knows there are enough of them. Marriott International CEO Bill Marriott, for example, records his blog posts into a digital recorder; someone on his staff transcribes and posts the entries, word-for-word—along with the audio file. An executive uncomfortable with writing can opt for a podcast; talking may come more naturally. He can participate in real-time chats. He can turn to subordinate executives to handle blogging chores (GM’s Rick Wagoner posts infrequently to the FYI blog; Vice Chairman Bob Lutz does most of the heavy lifting on the Fastlane blog). (Not all GM blog posts are by-lined, suggesting those that are were really written by the person whose name appears on the post.) Shell Oil’s CEO is participating in the conversation live and face-to-face on a lengthy road tour.

And if a business leader ultimately does opt to have someone else handle the writing of the blog, he should disclose it. What’s the harm in a statement like this on an executive blog: “Welcome to my blog. Several times each week, I articulate my thoughts to Mary Jones, who runs communications for the company, and she posts them here ensuring that I make the points I want to make. But rest assured, while Mary makes me sound better, the messages you read are mine; they come from my heart and I read all the comments myself.”

As for us communicators, we should advocate for blogging—as we should for any communication channel—that produces the best possible reputational outcomes for the organization. An undisclosed ghost-written blog doesn’t fit the bill.

I won’t win this one; mediocrity will. But I’ll keep fighting anyway.

1. This is an excellent analysis of the issue of ghostblogging. I actually think that unlike ghostwritten shareholder letters or speeches, ghostblogging will have a hard time gaining traction, because blogging isn’t a polished communication form, so it doesn’t lend itself to the production process of a speech or shareholder letter.

   Posted by Jon Greer  on  06/05  at  07:40 AM

2. I am inclined to come a little more to the center on this one.  My feeling is if the CEO is directing the content, is approving the words being said, and oversees commenting on his/her behalf, then it’s legit. 

   It’s unreasonable to expect a CEO to make themselves available for the five-ten hours a week bare minimum that true blogging demands. At the same time it’s of great benefit to have them feeding content to the blog. But I also agree with Shel that a disclosure should be made on the about section of the blog.

   Posted by Geoff Livingston  on  06/05  at  07:55 AM

3. So...is the only authentic Chinese food cooked by Chinese people? Authenticity is a very tricky, complex, and potentially explosive issue.

   But it may be beside the point. I’m not sure that I’d describe myself as “an advocate of ghost blogging.” I think that in *some* circumstances, done properly, ghost blogging is appropriate. But I also think that CEOs shouldn’t be prevented from blogging because of the idea that a professional writer would produce something more polished, or more frequent and consistent. I’m in favor of people writing their own blogs. I’m in favor of disclosure. I’m in favor of transparency. And I agree with Shel about the issue of expectations. I wouldn’t take a job like the one in the Dilbert cartoon.

   As I’ve said before, the only way for a writer to do a truly good job of ghost blogging the voice and thoughts of an individual requires just as much time and effort from the CEO as writing the blog would. If the CEO *isn’t* willing to put that kind of time in and to “own” the blog, then the result will be a travesty.

   Posted by Sallie Goetsch (rhymes with "sketch")  on  06/05  at  09:14 AM

4. I don’t think it’s a matter of time, as Sallie and Geoff suggest. If a CEO doesn’t have time to blog, don’t get someone else to ghostwrite a blog - don’t blog.

   With that in mind, I think that if a CEO does have time, they should at least have someone else help them write their blog. If they can do it themselves, great. But if they’re not great writers, then have someone like Sallie - and this is where I draw the line - help them turn their thoughts and ideas into words and sentences. I think the worst thing anyone could do is ask someone else to come up with the ideas and write them out, pretending to be them.

   Also, I wrote about this topic this morning on my blog before I read your post, Shel. Ghost blogging is certainly the topic-du-jour of late…

   Posted by Chris Clarke  on  06/05  at  10:30 AM

5. Chris wrote:
   “I don’t think it’s a matter of time, as Sallie and Geoff suggest. If a CEO doesn’t have time to blog, don’t get someone else to ghostwrite a blog - don’t blog.”

   I thought that was the point I was making: that proper use of a ghost blogger doesn’t save time, it just improves the writing. Working with a ghostwriter is *work*. If the CEO has too many other responsibilities, perhaps someone else in the company should become the company blogger.

   And there may indeed be companies that shouldn’t blog at all. If your customers aren’t online, and you don’t have a secondary market which *is* online, well, then--why bother?

   Posted by Sallie Goetsch (rhymes with "sketch")  on  06/05  at  10:50 AM

6. The solution, I think, is a company blog with many voices, including the CEOs. That way, it’s not on the CEO to either blog or have something ghosted. The trick here would be to get people other than PR to actually write for it.

   Posted by Jon Greer  on  06/05  at  11:06 AM

7. I think that’s a fine idea, myself. There are many good alternatives to the scenario posed in Dilbert.

   Posted by Sallie Goetsch (rhymes with "sketch")  on  06/05  at  11:14 AM

8. I don’t think a CEO needs perfect writing. In fact, mediocre writing establishes humanity. Before he Peter-Principle’d, Jac Nasser (still head of US operations, before becoming Ford’s top dog) sent a weekly email to employees. It was full of grammar and spelling errors, but he refused to let anyone touch it; he wanted everyone to know it was him, and just him, sending the email. That connection he established with employees earned him respect to the extent that shop steward sent him an email congratulating him on an obscene bonus he received. He blogged about business but also his pride in his daughter’s graduation and established himself—his AUTHENTICITY—and became a hero to his employees. (This all from a Forbes or Fortune profile I read maybe 10 years ago.)

   I’d rather read a real blog with average writing from the real leader than a well-written ghost-authored blog. And I don’t think I’m alone.

   Posted by Shel Holtz  on  06/05  at  12:17 PM

9. We have a company blog with three voices to give me a break a couple days a week! This is the best way to go because it gives an accurate picture of the company from top to bottom. See GM’s Fastlane for a great example.

   Like Sally, I would call Chris’s definition of “helping” a CEO out ghostblogging.

   GL

   Posted by Geoff Livingston  on  06/05  at  01:18 PM

10. There are definitely trade-offs with group blogs—advantages and disadvantages. You lose the distinct voice of an individual blog, like that of a Jonathan Schwartz, but you do provide a great cross-section of commentary. Another terrific example of a group blog is “Nuts About Southwest,” which features about 25 employees including pilots, flight attendants, ramp agents, members of the communications staff, traffic schedulers, and the CEO. The CEO blogs infrequently—only when he has something to say—but when he does, it’s pretty impressive (and, as I understand from my Southwest contacts, it’s definitely him). An example:
    http://www.blogsouthwest.com/?s=seating#

    Posted by Shel Holtz  on  06/05  at  02:20 PM

11. Hi Shel,
    I said much the same when I commented on Neville’s blog. Here is what I said:

    May 29th, 2007 at 22:57
    
    Hi Neville,

    I think that this situation and the discussion between Sally and you on FIR #243 show that certain perceptions about blogging may be changing. Here, you grappled with the question whether changing a blog title might violate some blogging principle. On FIR, you and Sally pointed out that an earlier disdain for “ghost bloggers” should be reconsidered–after all, what is different between writing a blog for a CEO and a speech?

    We don’t expect anyone to state who wrote their speeches for them; why do we hold bloggers to a higher standard?

    That said, I have always considered blog posts to have been written by the person posting it–unless told otherwise. If I start looking at blog posts and asking, “Hmmm, did s/he REALLY write this?” will my perception of that post change?

    It certainly shouldn’t from a factual standpoint: whatever statements are made, they should hold true regardless of the post’s author.

    But from a “trust” standpoint, I believe that I hold bloggers to a higher standard than I do leaders who use speechwriters. I don’t know why, other than the way we talked about candor, transparency and personal conversations when we pushed people into blogging.

    Posted by Tom Keefe  on  06/05  at  02:23 PM

12. Excellent analysis Shel, as I would have expected.  We are exactly aligned on this issue.  You’ve made the points much more articulately that I was trying to make in our two show Inside PR ghost-blogging marathon last month.  I’ll go to the barricades with you…

    Posted by Terry Fallis  on  06/05  at  07:02 PM

13. Hi Shel,
    Excellent call to action - I hope the community of readers will support your ideal. Blogs that become just a part of the marketing collateral will eventually be ignored by customers.

    Posted by Adam Zand  on  06/06  at  06:15 AM

14. I’m still on the “it depends” fence. My point has always been that it’s about how you *use* blog technology. If you take the case of a CEO blog, I see the point of the anti-ghostblogging crowd.

    But as blogs become more and more ubiquitous, where do you draw the line?

    People use blogs, for instance, to drive RSS feeds exclusively for corporate press releases--they’re behind the scene, but they’re there! Obviously those (press releases) are “ghostwritten.”

    What we do for one of our clients (and the subject of Bryan’s post) is scour the web for news of a specific type and blog about it--we drop in a link and a comment or two. We drop posts about new press releases or other company news when it comes out. We don’t claim to be any individual, but do blog on our client’s behalf. Is that a ghostblog? Is that a blog? Sure it uses blog technology, but that’s where the similarities to more traditional “personality” blogs ends IMHO.

    Additionally, I’ve been arguing that, rather than treating the blogosphere as a “special case,” companies should look to adopt the transparency ethic across all channels.

    In lieu of that Utopian wet dream, I think we need to take things on a case-by-case, or a catwgory-by-category basis. Hmm… Sounds like a blog post for me…

    Posted by Todd Van Hoosear  on  06/06  at  11:50 AM

15. I see your point; however, personal communications are not every CEO, COO or VP’s strongest skill set. Now, of course you could argue that communication should be every executive’s core skill set, but as a PR professional, I am paid to deal in reality. I would recommend that the content author submit a response for review to the professional writers / communicators so that obvious errors in grammar, syntax or spelling may be addressed prior to publishing without altering their intended message.  As the PR & Communication Manager for Florida’s largest real estate brokerage company, I believe the PR professionals must have an opportunity to shape the message to some extent.  Why spend the time writing if you are not making your points in a concise, clear and consistent way.  Visit Floridamoves.com to view over 375,000 Florida homes for sale today.

    Posted by Matt Gentile  on  06/06  at  01:41 PM

16. Todd, I think there’s a distinct difference between the use of the word “blog” to define the content management software that produces output in reverse chronological order and the output that is a “blog” as in personal journal. I use blogging software to produce an entire website for an organization for which I am the volunteer webmaster—but there isn’t a blog to be found anywhere on it. If a CEO is producing a blog, however, as in a personal journal, that’s what it should be...at least, in my opinion. Did somebody ghost-write Anne Frank’s diary? Lewis & Clark’s journals? The idea of somebody ghost-writing a personal journal just strikes me as disingenous.

    Matt, if a CEO is a terrible speaker, usually another executive in the organization handles speaking chores. If a CEO cannot produce a blog post, somebody else in the organization’s senior executive ranks should do it. That’s a far better solution than being called out someday for having generated a flog (fake blog); despite the rationale that could be produced in defense of the action, the perception will stick and the reputational damage will be done. Again, if it’s a CEO’s blog, the clear message being sent is, “This is my personal journal.”

    As I noted in my post, however, that won’t stop CEO’s from turning to lazy communicators who will turn CEO blogs into nothing more than the typical cynicism-producing CEO column on the inside front cover of employee magazines. It’s going to happen; I just wish it wouldn’t.

    Posted by Shel Holtz  on  06/06  at  03:51 PM

17. I have never been in the business of writing/rewriting/editing copy of any type for someone else. I have read and heard many hours worth of communication from On High. The only excecutive I ever knew that sounded like he was having a conversation with you was a fellow who was in charge of all stores nationwide for a former employer of mine. Five days a week, he left a voice mail message for everyone in the company. It might be a short “Attaboy!” or it might be 10 minutes on a specific subject. And he had bad grammar & ahh’d & umm’d & sometimes would go off on a tangent totally unrelated to what he was talking about. But you KNEW him! You knew he cared about you, the company, the shoppers, the vendors, etc. (And having later toured my store several times with this guy, I can vouch that he was the Author of every word he said)

    If I want facts or statistics, I’ll google them. I want a human being to be a human being. I they are a great writer/speaker, wonderful! If they cannot express themselves very well, they can only learn by doing. What can happen: other CEOs gonna call them up & make fun of them? Are the stockholders going to Bum Rush the annual meeting to get the person fired? I’m sorry: Robert Redford can’t run every company. If someone has to appear perfect in order to satisfy any group or individual (including themselves), they should be fired or the company should collapse & die. If we have built our entire Economic & Societal Structure on Looking Perfect, we all deserve to be out of work.

    Sorry I got too passionate there. I edit myself in posting in my blog or in my FIR comments, because I foul up, can’t think of the word I want to say, & generally sound dumb. But I am the one editing, because I am the one who knows what I meant to say. It may still appear that I’m dumb (lol), but it’s Me talking. Which is the point in the first place.

    Love & Peace, Clarence

    Posted by Clarence E. Jones III  on  06/06  at  09:13 PM

18. Thanks, Clarence...and passion is just what companies WANT in employees! I agree with you completely. Part of the problem with the tendency companies have to portray themselves as 100% perfect 100% of the time is that observers (customers, consumers, employees, media, etc.) all know better: NO company is 100% perfect 100% of the time. Let the CEO be who the CEO is and the company appears more genuine and credibility increases. The goals companies try to achieve by polishing every word actually produces the opposite effect.

    Posted by Shel Holtz  on  06/06  at  11:55 PM

19. OK, Shel.  I am in the ‘it depends’ camp here.  While I agree with Clarence about the type of morale boost this can be, I have to say that it depends on the purpose of the blog.

    If the purpose of the blog is to communicate information to employees and foster collaboration, then I see no reason why the CEO needs to post it himself as long as he generates and approves the content even if it does not end up on the blog the same way word for word.

    On the other hand, if the purpose is to foster interactive communication and boost morale, then by all means, it should be wholly posted by the CEO warts and all.

    I once had a CEO who addressed his employees en mass monthly by email.  His missives never included any capitalization. Everybody used to talk about how his notes never had any capitalization.  So what?  The fact is they were talking, they were talking about him and they were talking about his communication.

    So which way is better?  You are right...it depends.

    Missively,

    Mark Heise

    Posted by Mark Heise  on  06/07  at  06:22 AM

20. I am with you Shel.  I never liked ghost stories and certainly don’t believe in ghosts or ghost writers when it comes to blogging.  The whole point of blogging is direct, PERSONAL communications.

    And as we all know in the famous story, Cyrano de Bergerac, the ending is tragic. The truth will come out and not necessarily the way we want. Like Cyrano, perhaps the ghostwriters should come out from the dark and post themselves.  It may make for more compelling reading.

    Posted by Dan Greenfield  on  06/07  at  01:49 PM

21. I have to admit, I really had given this topic much thought before (which bugs me)...so thanks Shel for the dive into the issue.  Bottom line, I’m with you.  If it’s not in there skills or bandwidth, fine - then they need to fully disclose the method through which it is being done.  I wouldn’t care if it was disclosed, but I would care a lot if it wasn’t and I found out. 

    Long live transparency.
    Sean
    communitygrouptherapy.com

    Posted by Sean ODriscoll  on  06/07  at  03:45 PM

22. Mark, you’re exactly right; we’re in alignment. The CEO should blog if he wants to engage in a conversation with employees, to create clear line-of-sight between the front lines and the leadership, if he wants to inspire the troops. Conveyence of information does not require a blog at all. The right tool for the job.

    Posted by Shel Holtz  on  06/08  at  05:59 AM

23. I am coming late to this discussion.

    Shel you mentioned Anne Franks Diaries. I think is illustrative to the ongoing discussion. She actually produced 2 diaries. One she never wanted the world to see and the second she hoped would be become part of the post-war record when she heard that was the Dutch Government in exile plans. In the second she changed the names of a number of people to help protect their identies. After the war when her father received the diaries, papers and photos he edited them further and had them published. I am uncertain if the publisher suggested any changes. They were not even called The Diary of Anne Frank. They were called ‘The Backhouse: Diary notes from 12 June 1942 – 1 August 1944)’ and then Diary of a Young Girl.

    Translated from Dutch the title was changed. I do not know when the title became the one we are familiar with. As we know in translation sometimes a word or phrase is altered.

    Does this undermine their power or fails to capture the essence of Anne herself? No but by the ‘no Ghost rule’ the diaries fail and I guess most others would too.

    How many great works of art that we look at today are actually the artists ‘own work’ if in cleaning and restoring them minor changes are inevitably introduced. You would be shocked just how little material in art galleries and museums is ‘original’. Stand in front of frescos and other great works of art and may find that the artist used his ‘assistants’ to help. Some of the minor figures or background may have been done by a 3rd party under the skilled eye and direction of the artist. That is how they learnt their trade probably.

    I totally understand and accept the argument where a blog is written by a 3rd party but purports to be from someone else it is not honest. But ‘ghost edited’ and ‘ghost reviewed’? Why not?

    Over the years I have worked with many senior managers and executives. Some were brilliant communicators who would did most of the work themselves but expect a ‘polish/sanity check’ review. Others expected speeches and memos etc to be produced for them and they would edit. I have had CEO’s who are great at ‘town hall’ meetings but go wooden on stage and vice-versa. As a professional communicator I would be failing in my duty to them and the business to not help, coach and support. Most CEO’s expect that of their communications staff.

    Posted by Adrian Moss  on  06/11  at  11:09 PM

24. Shel - totally agreed on not ghost blogging. In Texas I was asked two times in the last Senatorial race to be a ghost blogger for the leading Dem candidates and responded with an unequivocal NO.

    The amazing value in blogs is that they can make one a great conversationalist as I find that many bloggers are fantastic writers, and perhaps are those same folks that before would never get in front of a crowd of thousands and give a rousing speech. There’s something powerful and palpable in being able to “write or blog” one’s thoughts out and clear and transparent is the only way to go.

    Posted by Nettie Hartsock  on  06/12  at  08:49 PM

Name:

Email:

Location:

URL:

Remember my personal information

Notify me of follow-up comments?

Submit the word you see below: