The thing I find strange about this is not that it happens but that it doesn't happen all the time...or that we do not recognize it happening:
...John Mackey, the chief executive of Whole Foods Market...used a fictional identity on the Yahoo message boards for nearly eight years to assail competition and promote his supermarket chain’s stock, according to documents released last week by the Federal Trade Commission. Mr. Mackey used the online handle "Rahodeb" (an anagram of his wife's name, Deborah). In one Internet posting sure to enter the annals of chief-executive vanity, Mr. Mackey wrote as Rahodeb, "I like Mackey’s haircut. I think he looks cute!" With all a chief executive has to do, the 14-hour days spent barking orders, digesting reports, motivating employees and courting Wall Street, why would they spend their time sparring with anonymous critics online? And what makes them think they won’t be revealed?It is hard to say that is is not more common than is thought. Is it so different compared to me running a contest over at the beer blog sponsored by a brewery that sends trinkets or a blog that speaks on a political or public topic that gains the blogger access to people and events that he would never have otherwise? How is it that this is not manipulation? And do we care (and not in the Amiel sense of "care") whether folks as insubstantial and sub-vermin (to borrow and Amielism) as bloggers are in a pocket of one size or another?
Comments
gorthos - July 16, 2007 11:07 am
Bah, nothing wrong with it at all..
Neas Troghos
Chris Taylor - July 16, 2007 3:51 pm
I find the practice incredibly lame and stupid, but not really something you want to craft legislation to prohibit.
Back in the late 90s when I worked for a dot-bomb, the corp used to employ a couple of people whose entire job was to monitor some of the small-cap stock forums for favourable or unfavourable mentions of the company. If favourable, they were supposed to pump it gently so that the notice remained near the top of the open threads. If unfavourable, they were supposed to counter it with counter-claims and generally dispute the accuracy/validity of the unfavourable mention.
And they were supposed to do all of this while masquerading as the average investor, never revealing their true identity as a company employee.
Later on, us IT jerks had some fun by ferreting out the company flacks and countering the company's forum PR with our tales of the disorganised and chaotic life inside head office.
gorthos - July 16, 2007 5:11 pm
Viral Marketing!
All's fair in love, war and marketing.