PR and the Internet

With Internet communication technologies becoming increasingly pertinent to today’s society, the implications of such technology still remains to be seen. With increasing reliance on the Internet, acting unethically can be tempting to PR pros. This however, undermines the profession and should be avoided at all costs.

A recent example is the YouTube video clip slamming Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton’s run for presidency. Raising a buzz online and in mainstream media, the clip is not necessarily controversial because of its content. What’s more controversial is the fact that whoever created the clip remains anonymous. In fact, the clip leads viewers to believe that Senator Barack Obama was behind it (this was denied)!

The line is fuzzy as to whether this technology belongs to marketers or PR practitioners, but both currently seem to have their hands in it. It may, eventually, belong to both. For that matter, it could have been Obama’s PR or marketing team that put up the video clip.

Last year, the Federal Election Commission (FEC) issued a statement that left Internet communications unregulated. According to The LA Times, The FEC wrote, "The vast majority of Internet communications are, and will remain, free from campaign finance regulation," the commission added that it was "affirming that Internet activities by individuals and groups of individuals face almost no regulatory burdens under the Federal Election Campaign Act." Although the FEC didn’t regulate Internet technology, it does not give PR professionals the right to act unethically.

In the meantime, a clip slamming the Obama run for presidency is supposedly underway.

Will these communication technologies become a major force behind swaying the public in the 2008 presidential campaigns? If so, what are the implications of outlets such as YouTube? Will it matter that the information is opinion and not necessarily fact? What will the public relations role be?