Microsoft PR: Worse than the FBI?

Wired magazine writer Fred Vogelstein recently wrote a piece on Microsoft's Channel 9 project, an internal skunkworks kind of deal that the company launched to communicate with the outside world, all without corporate intervention or oversight. So far so good: MSFT's tech nerds love it, and Channel 9 is reinventing the company as a potentially cool place to work. Vogelstein's full story is here.

But, in typical Microsoft fashion, one step forward is matched by several giant leaps back. In this case, Microsoft's PR agency, Waggener Edstrom, accidentally sent Vogelstein his own internal dossier, 13 pages of detailed notes about Vogelstein, his writing and interviewing style, the story he was writing, and Wired magazine in general.

PR agencies regularly keep notes and dossiers on reporters they deal with. I've asked to see mine on several occasions: The PR folks often bring them along to in-person meetings, and you can usually tell when they have one. I've never been denied the opportunity to read one. Invariably they've been innocuous paragraphs about where I used to work, how long I've been at my current gig, and maybe some personal details about my other projects, where I went to college, or my family. The kind of stuff that is good for small talk and building camaraderie during a meeting where the journalist might otherwise be skeptical and stand-offish. 

But the file kept on Vogelstein is something I've never seen the likes of, ever. By his count, it's 5,500 words of in-depth notes, strategies on how to try to manipulate him, and stuff that's more than a little insulting. Of course, it was never meant to land in Vogelstein's own lap, but it did. (You can see how it happened: How many times have you written a friend an email about another person, but put that person's name in the "To:" line by mistake?) Wired published the whole thing, which you can read here as a PDF.

WaggEd's president gamely tries to deflect the issue as nothing to be concerned about, a non-issue with "nothing suprising or nefarious" to it. He's the president of a PR agency, of course, so spin is his job. Alas, he doesn't make much of a case. Yes, it's in his best interests to ensure his client (Microsoft) gets the best possible coverage, but at some point you have to draw the line over attempting to manipulate the writer and insulting them in official documents.

I encourage you to read both Vogelstein's blog post and the WaggEd response and draw your own conclusions about whether such practices are appropriate or ethical. I've no doubt they're bound to continue: I shudder to think what the company's file on me might have in it. WaggEd won't even return my phone calls since I started covering Windows Vista with my gloves off.

Maybe that's a good thing. If nothing else, you can be sure Microsoft and its PR goons aren't manipulating my stories. (Dang, I guess that'll be another black mark in my permanent record.)