Mary Ann Carolyn Dalangin-Tordecilla

Corporate Websites: Surely Not the Last People Standing on the Web

The Internet perhaps, serves to create and cater a form of pop culture rather than be considered effective medium for communication. Arguments on semantics through written texts and other forms of miscommunication proved this point. Yes, this kind of cases happen everyday on chat, forums, blog posts, etc. However, just like CE’s discussion about online communication, this fault should not be blamed on the medium itself but on the people who are getting the wrong notions about how the Internet can be both a powerful and effective tool for communication.

I was just reading the Corporate Engagement blog on its post calling corporate websites to take their sites seriously, and I must say that although the post is too generalizing and pessimistic in nature, I would still have to agree with some of its points.

The Internet perhaps, serves to create and cater a form of pop culture rather than be considered effective medium for communication. Arguments on semantics through written texts and other forms of miscommunication proved this point. Yes, this kind of cases happen everyday on chat, forums, blog posts, etc. However, just like CE’s discussion about online communication, this fault should not be blamed on the medium itself but on the people who are getting the wrong notions about how the Internet can be both a powerful and effective tool for communication.

Yes, there could be a lot of noises and miscommunications happening online, but the way the Internet was built—- fast, easy, and accessible—-also paves the way for people to correct these problems in the same manner. Suppose in the case of blogging, a blogger made a mistake on his post. This mistake could easily be corrected once he logs in. That is just human error in his part, and could easily be undone once he has his PC or laptop and internet connection. Could any other medium do the same?

As said before, the problem lies with people who are afraid to adapt on the way the Internet communicates. As CE mentioned, these people are mostly from corporations and NGOs, whose websites are tragic, and therefore don’t achieve anything like the potential of an online presence that costs them many thousands if not millions to setup and maintain.

However, we could also say that there are major changes on some corporate sites (I am not sure if there are any NGO sites that are interactive in form), highlighting usability and making their site more of a two-way communication process. But the sad truth is that those corporations whose websites are very traditional in nature are part of the bigger industries and whose brands are popular offline. Maybe they don’t need to enhance anymore popularity, however, establishing a website but not doing well on web marketing still makes a big difference. And this difference will affect the overall performance of any industry, no matter how big and popular it may be outside the web.

This is the exact point that CE posted on its blog. If its discussion may be too pessimistic, it acts as a serious warning that corporates should start listening. Here are CE’s highlights on what ROI and maximizing your web presence should really mean:

1.Many bloggers, operating on the smell of an oily rag, have higher profiles, more traffic and bigger link banks then you do – why? Partly, its got to do with communication as listening as well as preaching, its also got to do with being committed to providing a rich stream of purpose designed fresh content (as opposed to providing an online repository for dull brochureware), its also got to do with the way search engines operate (wise up burying your content on some difficult to navigate mega site is costing you a bundle)

2.Bloggers have smashed the media controlled gateway between you and your audiences, but you still live in fear – why? Partly, its because corporate PR operations are just not setup to be publishers – again, its about fresh, relevant content. The website should be our first publishing option, not a place to post the media release. That’s a complete misunderstanding of the web and the media release. The web is a publishing environment (learn the skills of journalism and use them) and the media release has a sole purpose in life and that is to alert the media to a story – it is not the story – so publish your story on your website, not tyour release about it. Its also about scale. Releases are about big things or supposed to be but the news you have to offer your customers etc is much more than that. What might seem trivial to a space starved newspaper is still big for the audience interested in you and your activities.

3.People are using their blogs to talk about you and share their views about you and your products or service but you’re not using your website to defend yourself and promote your case – why? Partly, this is because our PR rules are based on the media gateway. You have to understand – you can’t starve the web of oxygen. You have to understand – the newscycle is gone. Newspapers might become fish and chip wrappers but blog posts don’t have to. They can be there forever – to be found everytime someone does a search. Popping up into the consumer / investor / regulator’s browser as fresh as a daisy, just as if it had landed on their doorstep in a shrinkwrap cover. It won’t go away, it’ll just lay dormant. You can’t ignore anymore.

Establishing a website is a serious business. If corporates would continue to ignore the possibilities of what the Internet could do for their business, then they are missing the opportunity to grow. Several years from now, these same traditional corporates would soon realize that the Internet is the major and most powerful tool for communication. If they don’t start adapting to its environment, then, most probably they would drain along with other traditional medium.

ORIGINAL ARTICLE SOURCE: http://onlinepr.gbwatch.com/online-pr/111.html

Article Tags: Why? Partly,, Media Release

Source: Free Articles from ArticlesFactory.com

ABOUT THE AUTHOR