*We were at a party held by Zappos that was STUFFED, and so I walked out.

*As I walked out, I saw Jess leaving, too.

*I said, “Jess, this is your town. Where should I take about 100 bloggers if we want to get away from that?” (pointing at the stuffed party)

*She paused, thought, and said, “Well, you can go to our club. I can call and tell them you’re coming.”

*Cool!

So, it was more like a friend we’d just met helping out. It wasn’t like Cirque was sitting around hoping I’d show up, and it wasn’t like they’d thought about this a bit.

Jess and I had talked earlier in the day about Cirque’s strategy overall, and about things coming in the future, etc. I introduced her to other friends at the event. We did what people do at conferences: got to know each other a bit and shared ideas.

At that club, the bloggers spent thousands of dollars (maybe 2 thousand) by the time the night was done.

Was that blogola? Because shit, I spent $200 to be wooed.

There was an event going on with typical mingling professionals. Some were community managers tied to companies (like Jessica) and some were more on the reporting side, regardless of the topic at hand (like Chris). Nobody was planning to give something for coverage, but people were getting to know each other like in any other event.

There was an unexpected opportunity (overcrowding) and Jessica helped out as a local with a venue. It wasn’t clear there was even another option.

The part that Chris was highlighting initially in his article was really that Jessica was a part of the conversation throughout the conference and was generally around…and then was kind enough to help out when the event was getting crowded.

“It’s crowded, know anywhere nearby to go?”
“Well, we probably have room at my bar.”

She was in a unique position to help, and hadn’t planned anything. Special treatment is probably part of the standard culture at the bar…so even though the treatment was special it wasn’t unusual for a Vegas venue.

Since that led to coverage, so much the better for her. But that’s how relationships work–when you hang around without trying to sell sell sell, all of a sudden someone is in a position to try your product or learn from you or whatever. She knew that it could help her employer, but she didn’t know HOW helpful it would be and she obviously wasn’t thinking too hard about “target market”–she was just trying to help some people she could.

I’m not of the opinion that helping is always a one-way street. So what that her helping led to some coverage, good for her.

When judging someone’s actions, in this case of blogger relations, it’s important to factor in the context and intent. Her intent was genuine and thus labeling this bribery is missing the point. I think it was being good to the community where you’re a member. The blogger relationship had already been forged.

As Qui pointed out, it’s valuable to show up…usually just for the conversation and relationship-building, but also for cases like this where you can really contribute.

And the problem is that the bloggers are being treated differently. Those travel writers would be a targeted group (I actually know a few travel writers, and not one would would be out for free because of employers’ rules regarding the ethics involved in that – I’m sure some do, but a big part of the problem here is that bloggers can be far more easily influenced to take these freebies because they don’t have that regulation keeping the ethics in check).

In cases we’re seeing lately of so-called “blogger relations,” companies are poorly targeting bloggers – we’re not talking about a resort bringing in travel writers. We’re talking about things like Molson targeting PR bloggers, and then saying things like “We’re in no way interested in publicizing our social media capabilities” (which would be the only relevant angle PR bloggers should have been interested in with their whole bit of drama.

I think it would be a mistake to confuse “socially connected people” with “highly targeted people.” And I’d also have to ask why socially connected bloggers should be treated any differently than other socially connected people who may have a bigger influence over their network – like some of those fans who would have spread the word to friends, family, co-workers, etc. had they been given the same treatment. Whose opinions do more people trust and make buying decisions on when it comes to “social” things like Cirque (or in Molson’s case, beer)? Those of a blogger they read who may or may not have any real knowledge about that topic, or those of their best friend? In other words, targeting an average Joe with a big mouth and bunch of friends could offer a far better return than targeting a blogger simply because they generally have good reach. There are different levels of “social connections.”

I don’t know if the conversations you mentioned took place in this case. They’d be irrelevant though unless those conversations centered around not the blogger’s interests, but those of that blogger’s audience. The blogger’s social connections are only of value if those individuals would care about what you’re trying to get some exposure for.

Yet, everyone likes to be entertained. Bloggers aren’t limited to verticals.

True, we all like to be entertained. So again, treat the Average Joe like a god, and not a blogger who can’t spread the word to a relevant audience. Many bloggers are limited in what they cover – they’re limited by what their audiences want and come to expect. If I go to a tech blog, I want to read about tech news or issues; not that the blogger was invited to hang out backstage at a concert b/c a label thought they had a big audience, or that someone was given a free green PC to try out if their niche is showing me the best new indie bands.

Should Cirque hit big blogs with news releases, even if they’re completely irrelevant, just because “everyone likes to be entertained?” If there’s any chance that blogger would complain and call it spam, that blogger knows they shouldn’t be covering that subject matter on their blog for their particular audience. Does getting something for free instead of just a news story suddenly make that company, product, event, etc. now more relevant and appealing to their audience? Not in the slightest.

I find it laughable that we can have bloggers out there blacklisting PR firms over releases, and have bloggers who really should know better betraying the expectations of their own audience/community (the lifeblood of a blog) the second they’re given an ego boost by some big company. Perhaps I should be giving kudos to the companies who learned how to play the game and manipulate – as a blog reader though, I find the behavior from both sides often disgusting (and I’ve quit reading several blogs for that very reason). Good PR?

On your comment to Jenn: you’re right, they did connect with a group of highly connected individuals; the issue is that Brogan is not an entertainment blogger! He’s a PR blogger, and as such should easily be able to distinguish between blogger relations and bribery. There IS a difference.

What occurred was a classic case of WOM 101. A two-way courtship made possible by both the bloggers and Cirque staff. Although the bloggers might not have had any interest or investment in Cirque beforehand, they were open to an experience. Cirque was there to give it to them, from a conversation to a place to play to possibly a performance. By extending those gestures, Cirque just put themselves on the map for people who can facilitate trusted WOM among their own audiences.

In response to Jenn’s excellent points, wouldn’t it be fair to say that Cirque gave their time, attention and some level of an “experience” to a highly targeted audience of socially connected people? I imagine conversations about interests and audiences would have taken place to determine who would value a free show – if any tickets were given away at all.

Back to Brandon: sure. The average person or fan might have felt overlooked as Cirque flirted with the cewebs. (Probably drummed up attention and buzz over anger). The evangelists (myself included) are cheerleading – they want everyone to be thrilled by Cirque. There are a lot of people that love this brand and love the shows, but don’t have the same reach. I’m willing to bet that Jessica and her Cirque cohort are figuring out the best way to leverage our enthusiasm and word of mouth.

Finally, Craig – great point about the financial implications of “showing up.” You don’t have to throw huge amounts of resources at this. One of our clients is planning to periodically invite local influencers to attend one of their events. The aim is very targeted towards people already invested in the “issue” at hand. Exposure through experience. Just one of many steps in cultivating the relationship, but easy, affordable and effective.