Financial Times says 50% of internet is "inconsequential rubbish"

Ok. It's not a definitive study but in an FT column about how businesses don't need PR firms to tell them how to use the internet, Michael Skapinker makes such a point:

"Like anyone who spends much of his waking time on the internet, I know it is divided into two parts: the handful of sites that help you run your life, catch up on the news and listen to your favourite tunes – and the remainder, which is mostly inconsequential rubbish."

It's an odd article, most of which I either don't agree with or find contradictory.

For example when he tries to justify the power of the web by providing examples of online campaigns that have delivered tangible results at least two of his four examples are wrong.

• "Cadbury decided to bring back the Wispa chocolate bar after a series of online petitions and social networking campaigns" - uh uh. Major PR firm involvement with this one. I have it on good authority.
• "HSBC agreed to reverse its plan to deprive new graduates of free overdrafts after widespread protests on Facebook" - again, Facebook campaign received significant co-ordination, support and wider PR thanks to the guys at the National Union of Students.

In both cases, advice from PR people was paramount in understanding a wider public concern/interest, finding a platform to communicate that concern and help articulate it.

Aside from that, I think Michael's overall column misses the point entirely as to the changes taking place with the internet. He sees the internet in a very traditional (dare I say web 1.0?) light. He talks about:

"signing up to have my groceries delivered by tesco.com a decade ago ... Like many of you, I do all my banking, bill-paying, book and shoe-buying online."

Bascially, he sees the internet as a collection of useful (or not useful) websites rather than a network for communities to congregate and communicate. In that respect Michael is correct. Companies don't necessarily need PR firms to tell them how to book their travel, but they do need them to help communicate with networks of customers or stakeholders.

Technorati tags: Financial Times, Michael Skapinker, internet, Public Relations, inconsequential rubbish

Comments

[Jean-Marie Le Ray]

Hi Simon,

I think the title of your post is wrong.

Michael Skapinker didn't say that "50% of internet is inconsequential rubbish" (Simon said it), but that (Internet) is divided into two parts...

It's not exactly the same thing. Two parts could mean, say 90% for the handful of sites that help you run your life, and just 10% for the remainder (which is mostly inconsequential rubbish), or so on...

Jean-Marie

[Simon Collister]

Hi Jean-Marie Yes.... you're right, but I was trying to be sensationalist! :)