It is no secret that social media has become the dominant channel of corporate communication for many businesses. And it’s not just one-way communication, but also a dialogue between the companies and their customers. As well as rarer cases of conversations between companies and other companies.
Some examples are more extreme than others, but there is a reason why companies ought to be careful with their communication.
Some might be of the opinion that bad publicity is better than no publicity, but there’s a whole discussion of how that’s not always the case and where it can go south really quickly.
First off, Nikki G., a specialist in strategic communication, content, and writing, explained that the phrase “bad publicity is better than no publicity” was originally coined by a circus showman, who was more of an exception and not the rule.
P. T. Barnum, the showman behind the phrase, was in a business situation where it actually made sense to generate more buzz through controversy and scandals. However, not all businesses can (or even should) thrive on it.
The other argument is that publicity is one thing, but reputation is a whole other can of beans.
Publicity is viewed as achieving awareness. There is no good or bad per se as it is just that—awareness, knowing that something exists. Reputation, on the other hand, is what carries over into people’s minds as what something is and why it should or shouldn’t matter. In turn, it is what ultimately makes people decide on whether to invest into something or not.
And since we’re on the topic of terminology, Nikki also differentiates between the terms publicity and PR. TL;DR: they aren’t the same.
The purpose of PR is to manage a company’s reputation. That is done through good relationships with the public. So, good PR would mean that a given company has a positive reputation that reflects what it stands for.
