Wikipedia:Statement on Wikipedia from participating communications firms
On February 7, 2014 a roundtable discussion was held at Donovan House hotel in Washington, DC, bringing together individuals from Wikipedia's volunteer community and from digital practices of several of the world's leading communications agencies (as well as academics), for a conversation about the complex relationship between these two very different groups. The conversation followed in the footsteps of previous efforts, including the 2012 formation of Corporate Representatives for Ethical Wikipedia Engagement and publication of a best practices guideline by the Chartered Institute of Public Relations.
These agencies have articulated a clear message: they intend to do right by Wikipedia as well as their clients. While only one step in what may be a long process, this clear statement is also a necessary one. These agencies realize that the Wikipedia project's credibility and relevance come from its focus on accuracy and objectivity; therefore professional communicators' actions should always support those goals.
Statement on Wikipedia from participating communications firms
Released June 10, 2014:
All listed agencies are confirmed participants and all individuals are confirmed agency representatives as of November 2016:
- Golin—individual has departed; new representative confirmed, awaiting user account
Inactive pending re-confirmation
- Adelanto (Daniel Rodet, User:Eurobas on WP in English and my SUL User:copyleft))—unresponsive
- Peregrine Communications—individual has departed; pending new representative
- Chandler Chicco Companies—individual has departed; pending new representative
- DeMoss—individual has departed; pending new representative
- Keene Communications—individual has departed; pending new representative
- Llorente y Cuenca—individual has departed; pending new representative
- New Venture Communications—pending re-confirmation
- RFBinder + Partners — pending re-confirmation
- Ruder Finn—pending re-confirmation
- Text100—pending re-confirmation
*Denotes agency and / or individual participating in Feb. 7 Donovan House meeting.
How to join
Because we seek the widest possible support for this initiative, anyone in good standing on Wikipedia may join on behalf of either a) an agency, marketing firm, marketing department or b) institution, association or other industry organization. (The best way to list individuals in support of this statement is currently under discussion on the Talk page.) To join, follow these steps:
- Determine which category you believe it makes the most sense to sign on as.
- Share this statement with the appropriate decision-maker and obtain their consent to follow the principles espoused.
- Identify one person to be the participating representative and point of contact with the Wikipedia community.
- The point of contact should choose a username consistent with Wikipedia's username policy and create a Wikipedia account.
- Create a user page, including a statement about your affiliation. (Optional but recommended)
- This individual should find the correct section above and add their organization and themselves to the listing as follows: Organization name, (Individual name, [[User:Individual username]].
- Send an email to donovanhousegroupATgmailDOTcom to join the associated mailing list.
- Maintain a good standing within the Wikipedia community and contribute productively.
Media coverage and industry response
Upon release, the statement received significant attention from industry publications such as Ad Age and PR Week. Additionally, the agreement was the subject of articles in general business publications like Fast Company and the Wall Street Journal; internet-focused websites such as The Daily Dot and The Verge; and general news websites including Politico and Slate. It also received attention from non-English media, including the German ZDNet and Dutch Telegraaf.
11 companies were signatories at launch. As reported by PR Week in successive coverage, the list had approximately doubled by the end of the week, with other multinational PR firms signing on to support its aims. As of April 2017, it has 34 active signatories and 11 lapsed signatories.
While media coverage tended toward simple reporting of the statement's existence, commentary was largely favorable, citing it as a positive step toward improving the rocky relationship between Wikipedia's community and the PR industry. However, Adweek quoted a PRSA representative expressing caution that it "could actually support the notion that PR pros somehow deserve to be singled out" when individuals with other motivations can cause trouble as well. It also quoted Wikipedian John Broughton, saying the aims of the statement are difficult to judge, given Wikipedia's "astonishing number of policies and guidelines".
- CIPR Wikipedia Best Practice Guidance for Public Relations Professionals (Version 2.1)
- Corporate Representatives for Ethical Wikipedia Engagement
- A history of Conflict-of-interest editing on Wikipedia
- How the PR Industry Views Wikipedia, Wikiconference USA 2014 session, with Andrew Lih (American University), Michael Bassik (Burson-Marsteller) and William Beutler (Beutler Ink)
- Paid editing moderated discussion, Wikiconference USA 2014 session, with Andrew Lih (American University) and William Beutler (Beutler Ink)
- The Plain and simple conflict of interest guide
- Phil Gomes - "PR Must Embrace the Hacker Ethic" - May 27, 2014
- Marcia DiStaso - Perceptions of Wikipedia by Public Relations Professionals: A Comparison of 2012 and 2013 Surveys - 2013
- Sebastian, Michael (June 10, 2014). "Top PR Firms Say They Won’t Edit Wikipedia on the Sly". Ad Age. Retrieved April 17, 2017.
- Bradley, Diana (June 10, 2014). "PR firms outline Wikipedia compliance in joint statement". PR Week. Retrieved April 17, 2017.
- Ford, Sam (July 24, 2014). "How To Succeed In Online PR? Get To Know the Wikipedia Community". Fast Company. Retrieved April 17, 2017.
- Elder, Jeff (June 10, 2014). "PR Firms Vow to Abide Wikipedia’s Rules on Conflicts". Wall Street Journal. Retrieved April 17, 2017.
- Sampson, Tim (June 10, 2014). "Major PR firms promise to play by Wikipedia’s rules". The Daily Dot. Retrieved April 17, 2017.
- Khaw, Cassandra (June 11, 2014). "PR firms promise to play fair on Wikipedia". The Verge. Retrieved April 17, 2017.
- Tau, Byron (June 14, 2014). "PR Firms Will Back Off Client Wikipedia Edits". Politico. Retrieved April 17, 2017.
- Hay Newman, Lily (June 17, 2014). "Wikipedia Is Smoking Out Paid Editors". Slate. Retrieved April 17, 2017.
- Kalenda, Florian (June 11, 2014). "Führende PR-Firmen erklären sich gegen Manipulationen von Wikipedia". ZDNet. Retrieved April 17, 2017.
- "Wikipedia en PR-bedrijven tekenen code". De Telegraaf. June 11, 2014. Retrieved April 17, 2017.
- Bradley, Diana (June 13, 2014). "MLSGroup, Weber add names to Wikipedia PR ethics framework". PR Week. Retrieved April 17, 2017.
- Bradley, Diana (June 16, 2004). "Eight more PR firms join Wikipedia compliance pledge". PR Week. Retrieved April 17, 2017.
- Coffee, Patrick (June 12, 2014). "7 Experts Weigh in on the PR/Wikipedia Agreement". Adweek. Retrieved April 17, 2017.
- "For Immediate Release: "Wikipedia and the Communications Professional: A Primer"". Beutler Ink. September 16, 2014. Retrieved April 17, 2017.