Another gobshite wants to regulate Irish Blogging

Simon Palmer from Republic PR, come on down. People are saying things on the Internet that he can’t control.

Simon wants a code of conduct and a watchdog for those that blog. I bet he’d also like women to lose that vote that we gifted them with recently.

Ideally, the Irish blogging sector should have a professional membership body with a code of conduct. Even better, they could come under the remit of a watchdog for blogs that would have a role similar to an ombudsman.

Simon suggests he contacted Irish bloggers to have coverage about a client removed. Can those bloggers he contacted step forward?

These days, though, news spreads fast, so the story was quickly on the blogs. When I started to contact those blogs, I presumed they would also want to ensure the information they were covering was correct.

The reaction, however, was surprising. The majority of bloggers couldn’t have cared less whether the details they’d printed were accurate or not.

How many bloggers? I’m thinking he contacted a dozen the way that’s phrased.

They seemed to think they had turned into Ireland Inc’s answer to Perez Hilton just because they were writing a blog. Others justified passing on inaccurate information by saying that they were repeating what had been written in the papers, which is simply passing the buck.

So come on folks. Can the Irish Perez Hiltons step forward and show us the emails that Simon Palmer sent you? No comments by Simon on any blogs either. Blogging relations 101?

The bit of the article I find most troubling and actually sinister is how Simon goes about his business with the media:

It allows me to bring them closer to the story by giving them‘‘ off the record’’ information, or details on an ‘‘unattributable basis’’, confident that I am protected by their professional standards and that what is agreed as off the record and unattributable will remain exactly that.

Unfortunately, this is not something I can feel confident of when dealing with most blogs.

Yeah bloggers have a low tolerance for bullshit and fakery I suppose. How sneaky is that? What a cynical way of dealing with the media. That’s the complete opposite to transparency and openness.

I’m not at all surprised it was someone from the PR world that wrote this. If ever there was an industry all about control, it’s this one. Well it used to be actually. Thank god this is changing though. It’s great to see so many Irish PR companies embrace the new ways of doing business and communicating. Many of those that have yet to do so are asking how to do it and are going about educating themselves. Not all though. Some seem to want to lock the doors and windows of their firm and hope that web thing will go away. Slightly embarassing too that the PR Institute of Ireland was all hip and cool by including a Twitter question in a recent exam. And getting it oh so wrong. Still, they tried.

I know, let’s censor and create a special code of conduct for PR companies that they have to tell 100% of the truth and can’t do the shadow lurking off-record bits anymore just because one of them is clueless. Yes, let’s rail against 1000s for one of them being a fool. Oh right yeah, that’d be stupid.

The Republic PR website is a hoot too. Check out their balog. Love this phrase too.

Marketing over the internet is a critical part of any companies marketing

Who the fuck wrote it? Marketing over the Internet. Is that MoIP like VoIP?

Update: The PRII have their AGM next week. Head along to Jurassic Park and spot a brontosaurus.

Tommy has his say.

54 Responses to “Another gobshite wants to regulate Irish Blogging”

  1. samanthai says:

    This Palmer fellow seems to think that blogging is the same as a newspaper and folks are paid to share vital news; thusly, held to an accuracy clause. Regardless of accurate intel, regardless if what someone blogs is utter bollocks-censorship is a fascist mentality garnered by people like this Palmer who [sorry had to remove that bit]. Further, if he is going to state things “off record” he’s wanking himself down a path – hardly a blogger’s hand doing the shake, now is it?

  2. Twenty Major says:

    Yeah, I’d love to know who he contacted. Perhaps he could tell us.

  3. This is such a poor piece, I’m surprised the the SB Post would give this unknown PR expert the column inches.

    Major blooper by this planning consultant.

  4. Gamma Goblin says:

    Someone contacted me offering penis extension pills at “super low prices”… maybe that was him?

  5. le craic says:

    If someone approached me in a reasonable manner and asked me to correct an innacuracy or untruth on my blog, I’d have no problem doing it. Why does your argument end up by having a childish pot shot at their blog?

  6. dublindoc says:

    Going on about ‘qualifications’, he’s not exactly qualified-to-his-eyeballs himself. His LinkedIn profile is hilariously revealing. He keeps changing his style in his “about me” bit, referring to himself in the first and third person every second paragraph. Good few grammatical errors, too. He’s only being doing PR since 2006, (this after his degree in town planning) and humbly refers to himself as “Ireland’s leading freelance public relations’ consultant: ‘Mr Republic’ “. That’s got me my giggles for the evening. Who is this fool?

  7. dublindoc says:

    That meant to read “only been doing PR in Ireland since 2006”. Stupid lack of sleep!

  8. Pat Phelan says:

    what a dipstick
    Didn’t we go through this sheriff badge shit last year
    Really interested in who he contacted

  9. It’s funny, I was just thinking the other day that the PR and marketing industries need more effective watchdogs, to make them stop telling lies, which, for many, seems to be basically their core business.

    Weirdly, their website doesn’t show up on Google when you search for the obvious things.

  10. Also, from their site: “There are often two sides to a crisis [some nonsense elided] In a legal action the true battle often takes place in the media and not the courtroom. A targeted media campaign to support a legal case can often be the most important factor in bringing the opposing side to the negotiating table.”

    So, basically, they would seem to be interesting in less of the truth and more of the ‘truth’. Hmm.

    Also, that widget along the top for choosing site section is among the worst sins against UI design I have ever seen. Ugh.

  11. nabidana says:

    Tomorrow I shall write a parody website of the Republic PR one, but it will have some notable differences:

    I will change the favicon.ico to make it marginally less obvious what system it’s built in (Joomla is lovely in the hands of someone who knows what the fuck they’re on about, but I’ll do it in wordpress because I am lazy)

    I will make the images marginally less headstretchy

    I will be intentionally, rather than unintentionally funny.

    Don’t give PR people too much of a bad rap; I was sitting those exams, and, genuinely, the emphasis is on professional ethics and standards out thw wazoo. Where people like this chappy fall down flat is their over-reliance on jargon.

    People who wish to regulate the blog community may well come up against an Irish Guido Fawkes. That would be amusing to see, Mr. Palmer.

  12. […] Another gobshite wants to regulate Irish Blogging […]

  13. jean says:

    It’s a hilarious concept all right, a PR agent complaining about inaccuracy! And to hold the print media up as paragons of ethical behaviour…also hilarious.

  14. […] Palmer of Republic PR has not shown that he understands this. In fact, I was alerted to this by Damien Mulley, who, however abrasive, is very much clearer on how media and new media exposure is changing […]

  15. nabidana says:

    As promised, I have written a parody, not as originally planned based on the Republic PR one, but what will become a generic parody of PR consultancies in general.

    If any bloggers have a view on the site, or would like to add to its currently empty shell, please do let me know.

  16. squid says:

    Have dealt with a number of PR companies , and it’s safe to say that Republic PR isn’t one of them.

    While most can be great, some can be quite childish. I had one company who had a politician on their client list take me off their mailing list because I criticised that politician. Now when I get whiney emails asking why I don’t even mention said politician and what he is up to I respond by saying, “ask his PR company. they fcuked off of their own accord.”

  17. Spade says:

    Simple pieces of advice for Mr. Palmer:

    1. Giving out about the lack of accountability and code of conduct of bloggers is like shouting fire in a crowded theatre – you really can’t expect anything good to come of it.

    I’m not sure what he imagined would happen, except the obvious backlash…

    2. Don’t claim to be able to provide Digital PR, when you a) obviously don’t understand the basics and b) the backlash you’ve created will only serve to give people the opportunity to publicly draw attention to your lack of skills.

    My favourite is idiotic business blog posts – blogging about how you’ve been duped by some nigerian scammer and then having crisis management as one of your service offerings????

    3. Don’t call yourself the “Grande Fromage” of your own (sole trader) company – it just makes you look like a to$$er, who has no idea about brand management let alone how to manage that brand in the media.

  18. Spade: He also has a piece on ‘cloud computing’ which is quite fascinating in its total misunderstanding of the term.

    Hint to mainstream media types. If you wish to write about a scientific or technological topic in an authoritative manner, please make sure that you understand it first. If you find yourself unable to understand it, then kindly shut up about it.

  19. TUG says:

    Well… He can do PR obviously, I suppose it was never about winning the argument!!!

    Code of conduct? Mother O’God!!!

  20. Spade says:

    Obviously a subscriber to the Wildean school of PR.

    “The only thing worse than being talked about is not being talked about.”

  21. Hi Damien,

    A bit of perspective here.

    Fair enough, you disagree with Simon Palmer. And plenty of others here do, too. Perhaps that’s inevitable: he was clearly courting controversy with this kind of piece.

    I can think of many sensible things that could be said to counter his view, such as that the traditional media can be every bit as dodgy, when they so choose.

    But the fact is that working journalists have editors, and subs and lawyers who check and recheck their work. Most of us — the print media — just CAN’T go with whatever story is doing the rounds. Bloggers can and often do.

    It’s a different way of expressing oneself and it requires a different approach from PR folks, no doubt about that. But can you really insist that bloggers don’t have a case to answer here? Are there not instances where people lose the run of themselves, where a little bit of restraint might have been worthwhile?

    A filter plays an important role in trustworthy reportage and comment. I think this is the main issue here.


    Catherine, (media and marketing editor, Sunday Business Post)

  22. Simon Palmer says:


    I think you and a number of other people have misunderstood my main point, which was aimed primarily at business blogs, which was stated at the beginning, not all of Irish blogs. I was not implying some kind of forced statutory regulations akin to Chinese censorship of the internet what I was trying to get across was that as readership of blog grows in popularity more companies will start to promote themselves directly at blogs in the same way they currently do with the traditional media; therefore, it would be beneficial for the quality business blogs to self-regulate or adhere to a conduct of conduct. This would provide more comfort for companies when dealing with them for the first time and mean that they are more likely to give information to those that adhere to professional standards. This can only be good thing in the long run.

    With regard to your comments in relation to ‘off the record’, I see you provide a media training as service, well learning about ‘off the record’ and ‘unattributable’ were the first rules I was taught in media training. Far from being sinister they provide complete transparency when dealing with the media by allowing companies to give the press details of confidential information so that they can get the complete background to any story. Transparency is fundamental to ensure the media are fully aware of all the issues, but ‘off the record’ is necessary when dealing with sensitive issues such as legal cases where the full disclosure of information could jeopardise the case. Whereas an ‘unattributable basis’ allows a journalist to get first hand information directly from a source giving them the benefit of being able to use the information whilst protecting the source e.g. the identity of a witness. I can assure you this is basic media relations and ensures transparency and openness, there is nothing ‘sinister’ or ‘cynical’ about it, which is why I was happy talking about it in a prominent newspaper.

    I am not going to disclose which blogs I spoke to, either the good or bad, that would unprofessional, unethical and unfair on the bloggers. Some of them are professionals in their fields and, whilst I did not agree with the way they reacted or responded to me, I am not going to ‘out’ them in public and potentially affect the reputations of the businesses.

    Just to address a few individual comments:

    Dublindoc: I have been doing PR for ten years. The ‘Mr Republic’ is me taking the piss out myself and client who calls me by that very moniker.

    Nabidana: If you do the parody of the site I’d be happy to link to it from my site. I think it would very funny to read.

    Spade: I totally appreciate you think nothing would come of it but what I wanted was to start a sensible debate about recognition for business blogs.

    I wasn’t duped by a Nigerian scammer! I was taking the piss out of VRT comparing it to scam. The last thing I would be doing is telling people if I had actually been scammed.

    The ‘Grande Fromage’ term was also a piss take precisely because I am a one person company and a client takes the mickey out of me by calling me by this moniker as well as the one above. It is parody of sole traders who call themselves ‘Managing Directors’ of their own company; I would hardly call myself a big cheese if was managing people. I just get sick of people being totally serious in business and think it is important to laugh at yourself once in while, but obviously the joke is going to be lost on some people in the written form as you can’t imply tone or the fact that it is light hearted.

    All the best,


  23. Name the Irish Blogs Simon.

  24. Simon Palmer says:

    No that wouldn’t be fair. These people write their blogs as a sideline to boost their SEO, that’s why they just lift stories from the paper and copy them in each day before they get down to their professional careers. Most of them have run businesses successfully for a few years, others are employed and some no doubt have wives and children that they support. Any rumours of unprofessionalism in relation to blogs that they write, no matter how badly they do it, could reflect on their business or employment as a whole. I do not want to be responsible for anyone losing their jobs or livlihood, no matter how small the risk. That would be morally unacceptable, unethical and damn right nasty. Just because we are on line and unregulated it doesn’t mean we don’t have adhere to acceptable standards of decency.

  25. What a cop out.

  26. It’s precisely this business of a filter – ie editor – which is so obnoxious and so poisonous to ‘freedom of expression’. As if this brings with it higher standards of journalism. As if.

    I think that Catherine will find there are irresponsible newspapers – such as the one which reported in big headlines last week that ‘Swine Flu Terror Hits Ireland’ (one case so far and the victim is recovering handily by accounts) – as much as there are irresponsible bloggers. There are plenty of other examples – thousands in fact. We all remember the way Liam Lawlor’s death was misreported. And we all know that newspapers are playing a game of catch up with the blogosphere. The blogosphere is where freedom of expression isn’t reserved for the extremely wealthy and their paid pens for hire. Those who don’t heed the message will go the way of the Dodo – or the Boston Globe….

  27. Suzy Byrne says:

    Blogs who lift stories from papers and copy them? Then the stories from the ‘regulated’ press are the problem also surely? I’m confused! You contacted the bloggers for stories to be removed on behalf of clients? You also did this with the mainstream press where these articles originated? Press Council Complaints? BCCI complaints?

    You admit standards of decency exist online also – confusing me even more. (Yes in the blog world there are standards and self regulation and calling out the fictitious or spurious by their name and even fact checking!)

    I didn’t think the offending blogs existed or had committed the ‘crimes’ worthy of such hype and am now more certain of this in reading your defence of the wives and children of the offending bloggers. No crime has been committed here surely Simon? If someone has published an article or piece of information which you contest you and your clients have many avenues open to you which can be used. The fact you may not be able to pull someone up and have a quiet word about it to influence things is what’s really at point here – in addition to the reality that information is far more easy to circulate.

    As a blogger if I make a mistake I expect to be pulled up on it – if I need to correct it (ie. it’s against the law or incorrect info) then I need to act. If someone disagrees with me or wishes to correct me they do so on their blog or other space.

    It’s a whole new world! One which no doubt you and your colleagues want to be able to manipulate and despair that it may not be possible. Thus It’s far easier to disparage it and deem it unreliable.

  28. Dena says:

    Blogs are surely a format whereby blog-owner has an outlet for their personal opinion, freely expressed and rightly so. Print media is largely owned by highly-politicised private companies with an agenda & very specific POV of their own, free to twist the truth as best fits it; all within the realms of “ethics” – though i refer to you to Concubhar’s reference to the overtly sensationalist attitudes of some.

    One key difference is that blogs are “out & proud” about their opinions/leanings – we like what we like, we don’t like what we don’t like, we laugh at what we find funny and get pissed off at what we find offensive. It’s not about twisting the truth to serve a higher power – they’re our honest opinions there for all to see and make of them what you will. All the while, print media remains notoriously less honest and more underhand about it.

    The question of whether business blogs require censorship is moot really. Business blogs are no different to any other in reality – if the writer(s) of the blogs with crappy sources and inaccurate information (whoever they may be) continue to spout rubbish then they’ll be found out for the idiots you claim that they are and will ultimately be ignored.

    Much like good blogs and the better print media – decent quality, integrity and a clear POV will mean people keep coming back for more. Crappy quality, a lack of integrity and suchlike will mean people stop coming back… and in the case of print media, stop buying (as evidenced by the rapid decline of print media). if you’re not relevant, make yourself relevant rather than taking aim at a perceived enemy!

  29. Mark says:

    If some of these are professionals in their fields as you say Simon, they are unlikley to be blogging anonymously – or at leadt you know who they are. Therefore it would be a stain upon their reputation, both professionally and personally, if they were seen to get their facts wrong. So, keeping what I’ve just said in mind, it’s safe to assume that anyone who is first-and-foremost a professional in their field would happily correct any inaccuracies – unless they were approached in the wrong manner – which wouldn’t happen with a PR company, or at least shouldn’t. In fact I’d say many would correct even if approached in the wrong manner, if they were blogging as a porfessional.

    So, the question is Simon, are you implying that these people who you approached purposefully providing inaccurate information about a) their competitors or b) their field by refusing to correct inaccuracies? and if so… why are you protecting these sources?

    If Mr.Politician tells a journalist off the record that he purposely misled the public, should the journalist keep it off the record because it might affect his career? No.

    So why do you say – “I am not going to disclose which blogs I spoke to, either the good or bad, that would unprofessional, unethical and unfair on the bloggers. Some of them are professionals in their fields and, whilst I did not agree with the way they reacted or responded to me, I am not going to ‘out’ them in public and potentially affect the reputations of the businesses.”

    On the contary, it would far more ethical, professional and in the interest of those who read their blogs to ‘out’ rather tha ‘protect’ your ‘sources’. Especially if they are misleading the public about the way their competitors are behaving, which I believe would be illegal…

    So, out your sources. Unless of course, there are no sources to protect.


    A blogger with a foot in the newspaper business.

  30. Treasa says:


    I currently haven’t got the time to address all the points you left on my site but seeing as there is one you raised here and there, I want to highlight that your intention to concentrate on business blogs was raised in the 9th paragraph of your piece, not at the start of the piece.

    You may have thought you were concentrating on business blogs but that is certainly not the impression you left your reader with. You effectively tarred all blogs – and they cover a multitude of specialisations from knitting to abandoned boats – with the same brush of not being trustworthy in your eyes.


  31. Laura Daly says:

    Did he contact you? NO. Well if I wanted to discuss bloggers in Ireland I think you would be my first port of call. Let us know if he does contact you.

  32. Simon Palmer says:

    Hi Mark,

    What you say is spot on. If the situation was as serious as your example implies then indeed it would warrant an ‘outing’ on the basis that you say. But, in this instance, it was not as serious a case as your example and I do not believe it was illegal, nor do I believe this is a case of public interest that is big enough to warrant public accusations on such a level.

    I approached them by phone in a very friendly and very courteous manner as I would do anyone. To me there was no logical reason why they would not want to amend an inaccurate posting. This is why I raised it as a potential issue for discussion in the SBP.

    The fact that my comments have been taken out of context, without seeking clarification, and built up in this manner is justifying the issues and dangers I was raising in the piece in the first place.


  33. Simon McGarr says:


    Though I’m mystified what a business blog is. Can Simon Palmer give us two or three examples, so we can follow his argument?

  34. “Most of them have run businesses successfully for a few years, others are employed and some no doubt have wives and children that they support. Any rumours of unprofessionalism in relation to blogs that they write, no matter how badly they do it, could reflect on their business or employment as a whole. I do not want to be responsible for anyone losing their jobs or livlihood, no matter how small the risk. That would be morally unacceptable, unethical and damn right nasty. Just because we are on line and unregulated it doesn’t mean we don’t have adhere to acceptable standards of decency.”

    Of course, your beloved newspapers would do it in a heartbeat, if it’d sell a few more copies. And rightly so, to an extent; corrupt politicians, for instance, have families too, but it is nevertheless important that they be outed.

    I’m confused, at this point. The issue is now that blogs are taking stuff directly from newspapers? Irritating, of course, and copyright theft, but I don’t see how it’s an argument for newspapers being somehow superior; newspapers do this too, frequently. Certain naughtier newspapers (newspaper? I only know of one company who does it, but they do it with distressing regularity) also rip off blogs, without attribution.


    “I was not implying some kind of forced statutory regulations” and “Even better, they could come under the remit of a watchdog for blogs that would have a role similar to an ombudsman.” Perhaps you should pick a viewpoint and stick to it.

  35. Simon Palmer says:


    I don’t agree that all newspapers would ‘out’ people in a heartbeat, of course some of the tabloids may do, but not the more serious end of press unless it was serious enough to warrant it.

    The issue has been from the beginning was that the blogs in question were ripping off word for word what the papers were writing. They were copying the html text of the website word-for-word, or having the hard copy re-written, but including the name of the newspaper, the journalist and the date it featured.

    I do, however, agree that blogs are being ripped off without attribution and this is unforgivable. This is another reason for forming an official blogs’ organisation/ombudsman that could also protect the interests/contents of blogs (membership of which I would like to clarify that I believe should be voluntary and self-policing).



  36. Right, well then that’s copyright theft, and already illegal, and there are proper channels already; no voluntary/involuntary bloggers’ organisations required.

  37. What business bloggers have their phone numbers on their blog? That should narrow it way down. I’m going to email them all and ask them to comment here about being contacted too or not contacted.

    I completely and utterly do not believe what Simon has said. Wives and children excuse is just additional bullshit.

  38. squid says:

    @Catherine O’Mahony

    Filters – Thats a crock of shit, If there are filters in newspapers then they need to be replaced as they seem to be broken.

    Where were the filters when the Sunday Independent claimed Gardai seized an automatic weapon at a funeral in Limerick last year, when in fact, no such incident happened. When the Top Garda chief down here disputed this claim, and it was reported in the local paper down here, rather than correct his story, the author of the false independent story went on a tirade in a letter to said local paper attacking them.

    Where was the bullshit filter in the Sunday Times magazine in relation to it’s false claims about certain parts of Ireland.

    The above are just two of the cock-and-bull stories which have appeared in the MSM, If I were to go through the archive of our blog, I am sure I could find a dozen more.

    Sub-editors, editors, lawyers don’t always save newspapers from printing false claims. In my experience, when a mistake can take days to be noticed in a newspaper, a mistake on a blog can be noticed in a matter of minutes. The blogging environment is seriously self policing, more so than the newspapers.

  39. nabidana says:

    Actually, it all seems relatively clear to me; I think this piece was blown somewhat out of proportion, and we began to play the man and not the ball. We’d all agree that the only form of filtration and censorship we trust is the stuff we do ourselves as bloggers, and some people like to rant for the audience more than others.

    A very small number of freelance blogs concentrate on business interests; they’re regulatable by law, and the law is not too slow in this area. The fact is, business needs to learn how to handle the fact that blogs exist, not the other way around.

    I think we need to see this as a drill; I think on balance Mr Palmer was not the first to put his head over the parapet, and it’s maybe a little unfair that we went off on one. However, in a society where the government plans to legislate against blasphemy and regulate political communication, we were right to stand up and show our teeth on this one.

    Even if I did play the man and not the ball.

  40. Laura Daly says:

    Judging by Mr Palmer’s very evasive answers I expect these business bloggers he contacted will have swine flu, navy hair, be living in Peg Sayers old homestead and selling spotty knickers on eBay as there business. In other words non persons.

  41. Gamma Goblin says:

    Are the knickers foil sealed for freshness? If so, I’ll take a dozen… in various “flavors”.

  42. Laura Daly says:

    Sealed like Fort Knox and for we are sending our finest various “flavors” Oh got to dash Si P is on the other line…

  43. Simon Palmer says:

    Robert – it may have been copyright theft but I didn’t ask if they had a licence, if they did then there’s no problem. But, I doubt they did and, if so, then yes it would be copyright theft. I think this is a big issue for newspapers in general, not just in relation to blogs but it’s widespread. As their revenue reduces I have no doubt they will seek redress on copyright infringements – they have already started doing this in the UK. I would envisage and agreement not to steal copyright as an important tenet of any voluntary code of conduct for blogs.

    Nabidana – I appreciate your comments and agree it has been blown out of proportion. The point of my idea is that I am trying to find a third way between companies and bloggers. At the moment most companies are scared of blogs (or don’t understand them) and on the other side of the fence a lot of bloggers are anti-corporate, sometimes these concerns are well found as we have seen in the banking crisis, but I do think there needs to be a better dialogue between both sides. I think this could also be a way bloggers can make some serious income in the future.

    Damian – You can’t bully me by pretending (and failing) to play the big man. And, you certainly don’t intimidate me. Have a word with yourself, I hardly think people are going to devalue themselves and their blogs by admitting using inaccurate information, refusing to correct it, and to boot throw in an admission of copyright theft from national newspapers. I can only hope that it helps improve dialogue in the future.

    Laura – It’s actually me selling the spotty knickers; there is a complimentary pair in the post for you. I hope you like them. Please give me feedback on my “Palmers’ Pants & Underjobbies” page on Ebay. And, Gemma I can certainly give you a discount on 12 pairs if you have an urgent shortage.

  44. Being called out for peddling bullshit and running around in circles when so many people have deconstructed your fiction is hardly bullying. Calling me a bully for pointing out you have yet to back up that piece the Business Post got you to write shows your through character. You generalise bloggers and say stuff about them and give untrue examples then when called on it you say you are thinking of their wives and children so won’t back up your facts. Stick to manipulating the press. Your article showed they’re happy to be a party.

  45. Simon Palmer says:

    I didn’t expect you to agree with me but I did expect an adult debate. You obviously have absolutely no idea how B2B media relations works. The one thing you cannot do is bullshit. Contacts are built on honesty, transparency, integrity and trust. You may love mouthing off and naming and shaming, but this is not something I am going to lower myself to. This debate is now too far off the point I was trying to make and has degenerated into bullying and a slagging off people, which is not something I want to part of. I’m out of here. Nuff said.

  46. Laura Daly says:

    OK think this may be getting to nasty.

    Simon – I think you under estimate Damien, wrong move also his honesty is 100% and I think you underestimate his knowledge of media relations. I get nothing from saying this, it is just the way I have found him. But I do agree with you slagging and bullying will not advance the debate.

    Damien – Hope the Paris Office is good.

  47. Enjoy being the running joke at the PRII AGM Simon. B2B. People still use that? Seriously though, the guy that operates in the shadows feeding information to the press in a veiled manor brings up honesty and transparency. Hilarious. Oh and Simon, my blog, my blog post, how on earth is something off the point? Off you go and make your Sheriff’s badge like a good little boy.

  48. Simon –
    From reading these previous posts i feel sorry for you for two reasons.

    One: now you are certainly off the hot list of those who are going to win an award at this year’s Irish blog awards.

    Two: You should have noticed that there is a core of contributors to damiens blog, and that these people have profiles and leanings that would not be considered conjusive with having any form of mature debate, espicially on topics that damien clearly dissagree’s with.

    I’m actually slightly embarrassed reading some of the previous comments in this post, it appears not only are they not interested in engaging with you on this topic, but they appear intent on discrediting and defaming you as an individual, so the term playground certainly springs to mind.

    But then again won’t this reply im writing be censored? Let’s see if the Mulley sensor kicks in?

  49. David: Given the state of his blog, the Blog Awards point is moot, and in any case implies that Damien has some undue influence about it.

    Defamation? He’s been defamed? Where? Isn’t it defamatory to incorrectly accuse somebody of defaming somebody, if done for malicious reasons? 🙂

    Also, if you are going to use long complicated words like ‘conducive’ while insulting people, DO please make the effort to spell them correctly.