Looking back fifteen years or so, I remember the first hints of what would become the Internet as we know it today. Back then, I was a young twenty-something attending Sacramento State University, majoring in Psychology, when a forward-thinking professor of mine decided to require the class to use email (then completely text-based) to communicate with him and the rest of my classmates. As put off as I was by this, I attempted to learn how to maneuver through this confusing ‘fad,’ and subsequently started spending a significant amount of time in the school’s computer lab.

Eventually, I discovered chat through a program called ICQ. The ability to speak with people from anywhere in the world was both nerve-wracking and thrilling at the same time. But, with that ability, I was hooked on computers and the Internet from that point on.

As I graduated college and moved into the workforce, I was fortunate enough to enter at a time when businesses were beginning to find ways to monetize their presence on the Web. Granted, most Internet-based businesses that started in the early part of the century failed due to a lack of well-defined revenue streams, but the ones that did persevere laid the groundwork for the next evolution of the Internet – Web 2.0.

As the Internet became a medium that was less about providing access to limited, passive content, and more about user interaction and collaboration, a huge paradigm shift began to happen with users across the board. The medium became less of a tool for businesses to communicate with their customers, but a way for the average person to communicate with the world.

On September 26, 2006, the Internet made a huge leap toward becoming what it is today with the launch of Facebook to the general public. From that point on, the medium has grown exponentially. Followed by other “social media” sites, as they were called, such asTwitter, Tumblr, etc., the Internet had finally become what futurists had envisioned – a platform marking a fundamental shift in the way people communicate, comprised of a large number of online tools and platforms that enabled even the least tech-savvy people to share perspectives, opinions, and experiences.

And yes, I realize that this is a PR-centric blog, so with that in mind, how have the Internet and Web 2.0 changed the way our profession conducts business?

Well, for one thing, it has forced me, as a PR professional to significantly expand my definition of what constitutes “media.” A decade ago, my media contacts were mainly at traditional print publications, with some of those publications beginning operations on the Web. Now, many of those traditional outlets have fallen by the wayside, as they compete with “citizen journalists” –  bloggers, Facebook pages, and Twitter feeds – for readers, while trying to maintain a sustainable level of revenue to support a staff of journalists.

It is my belief that, while some of those traditional outlets, such as the Wall Street Journals, ZDNets, and BusinessWeeks of the world will march on, many will not, and more and more often, the media that my colleagues and I will look to for our news and discussion will be the average Joe blogger with specific areas of technology interest (though not necessarily expertise). There are certainly downsides to this, but there are also upsides; the most significant is the fact that we have the power to interact with those on the leading edge of disseminating the news – and, more importantly, we hold the power to be among those.

As a formerly exclusive set, the media was a tough nut to crack for many of us, but through the evolution of the Internet and social media platforms, ANYBODY who holds an opinion can have a voice on the global stage.

And that may or may not be a good thing…

And that’s how it began.

President Obama made the point to emphasize that the actions only represented the doings of, “a couple of knuckleheads,” as he was quoted as saying on NBC’s “Late Night with Jimmy Fallon” and reported in dozens of articles.  But, we know it’s more than just a couple, and he knows it as well. At least two dozen people are being investigated between the Secret Service and the military, and we’re hearing that this may just be the tip of a very deep iceberg. Were there more involved over time? Just how far back in time does this reach into the organization – one clearly with such a reputation of prestige and power?

If the scandal proves to have a longer history and with even more officials involved, no doubt that the pr teams working on this are going to remain quite busy for sometime. President Obama called the case, “a little distracting” but I suspect that it may be more than that as the case and investigation continues to unfold.

So what’s the correct approach to take? Limit the info or be open and offer the details up front?

Public relations work and experiences from the past tell us that attempting to hide the details can cause the story itself to develop a new life of its own as the news media works to dig up the details. Every little piece of information then becomes even more newsworthy (especially if it was difficult info to obtain) as reporters can then trump, “Aha, Gotcha! More info found right here!”

Watergate is the classic study for a government scandal that was based on cover up attempts.  But most pr pros understand now that being transparent and coming clean about issues is the best way to handle them. It can be a hard blow to take initially, but by being transparent and open – you effectively squash much of the ability of the media to dig for more dirt. So if your spokesperson goes out with the message, “Yes, we messed up. Here are the details about what we know and how we’re going to fix things,” and the details are then provided – well, there’s really not much left to say.

Taking that open approach gives public relations the best shot at effectively controlling the news. The worst thing that a PR person can do is avoid the media (or dare I even suggest some may steer them toward incorrect information), which might well serve to turn the media against PR in general, which is never a good approach or idea.

What I look forward to knowing about with the Secret Service scandal is just exactly how the agency itself will respond as it works with the investigative committee. As a group that is “secretive” by nature, this one’s got to be making those folks, as well as many others in Washington, very nervous right now.

(Image creative commons license by Leeni! http://www.flickr.com/photos/29223627@N04/ )

I am the Scott half of that.

As the blog begins to take shape, Dave and I will be focusing on a number of interesting happenings in the profession, offering candid perspectives on the good (and bad) in PR.  We will examine interesting PR campaigns and maneuvers, and look at companies or executives who have taken disruptive approaches (note, disruptive isn’t all bad!) to promoting their agendas. Finally, we will focus on tips and tricks for running effective PR campaigns.

Ideally, this blog is for all PR pros, and we’d like to hear from you.  The information we cover will be from our perspectives, so we invite you to read, and then provide your own thoughts, especially if they are counter to ours.  That is what will make this interesting, ultimately helping us to provide a holistic perspective of the profession, from the mouths of the people who do it everyday.

With that, we hope you keep coming back!