This time last year I made a series of predictions about social media and public relations.  I suggested that while 2010 was a year of discovery, the past 2011 was going to be about sharing and engaging.  About communities being empowered by the knowledge they will have pooled together.  I highlighted from my perspective the challenges and opportunities that Facebook, Twitter and YouTube will pose for companies and individuals.  The impact that social networking has had on events during the past year has truly been beyond what anybody could have expected.

While 2010 was about Wikileaks, the past year has been about challenging the reputation of companies, organisations and individuals that used the law to hide their indiscretions.  Twitter and other social networks came into their own as members of the legal profession struggled to grasp the structure of communications across international jurisdictions.

In my post ‘2011, A Year Of Change In Public Relations,’ I said that the coming year was going to be about communities that were engaged and empowered.  Wikileaks showed what you could do privately.  Facebook, Twitter and YouTube were the channels through which you could anonymously share content and opinion.  They are the channels that gathered a community together, empowering them to seek the transparency that was far too often absent.  Even the once trusted media estate came under the gaze of the community.

The Arab Spring in North Africa was an occasion that surprised many commentators. Sharing of stories on Twitter about high-profile individuals was going to happen.  Managing reputations has now moved into a real-time business.  In fact, if something wrong has been done it is today best expected that such an act will become public.

Last year I also raised the point about the power of mobile, of cellphones.  Wherever you are you have a cellphone.  You are connected to a world of real time information that reaches you as quickly as you wish to access the news that is available.  News shared by the network that you are connected to.  Reliance on traditional news channels is long gone.  News is shaped by members of the communities that we trust, which is why from a public relations perspective crises are today that when audiences go negative on a brand, cause or individual.

As I stated, news organisations are not dead and they are certainly not dying.  They are just changing and adapting to become what their primary audience wants of them.  An adoption that will continue in the 2012.

But what about the coming year?  Well, I am finishing my thoughts on this and will share these with you pretty soon.

Facebook is moving into the news business, hoping to capitalise on news outlets latest refocus on social networking.  It’s Edition’s project will see the networking giant face-up to Apple and Google, who are both working on project to monitise our appetite for news in real-time.

Fifteen years ago news outlets opted to make the content that had a cover-price free online, a strategy based trying to get a slice of the then large online advertising pie.  Then, after putting all of it’s eggs in one basket, it faced with a severe decline in advertising revenue, forcing many newsrooms to cut their staff.  Then, after much strategising some outlets opted for paywalls, a decision that to this day still causes plenty of debate in the news industry.  Some outlets, like the The Times, Sunday Times, New York Times and the Financial Times delivered various options – fully restrictive or freemium services.  It all appears to have provided some security for the medium-term.

Enter Facebook, who with over 750 million members has decided to move into the news business with it’s Facebook Editions – an app that allows users to consume news within it’s walls.

News outlets had been working with Apple and it’s Newsstand offering which would update subscribers news subscriptions via an exclusive App.  I wrote a post about this in September 2009 about the ‘Changing And Charging TimesFor News.’ Many outlets have signed-up to Apple’s Newsstand.  Others haven’t, not liking the terms set out – including a 30% fee for Apple.  The Financial Times is a case whereby they have taken their content from the App Store and have developed an HTML5 site that can be accessed through iPhone, iPods and iPads.  Developed by Assanka, the HTML5 app is fluid and smooth and as a subscriber I have to say that it set’s the standard.

Facebook knows that over a third of its 750 million users access the site through mobile devices, and those who access the site on a cell-phone or tablet as active than traditional desktop users.  This explains why news outlets like CNN, The Washington Post and Rupert Murdoch’s The Daily are wanting in on Zuckerberg’s next project.

The fact is that the consumption of news has not diminished, it has most probably risen.  Start-up’s like Flipboard show how we the consumer like our news to be gathered from trusted sources that can verify content, such as journalists, as well as from friends and peers that can deliver unverified news, enabling us to be the first for news.

The speed at which news is consumed is what the PR community is going to have to focus on as outlets compete to deliver quality content.

UK national tabloid The News Of The World (#NOTW) is caught in the eye of a very public storm as revelations allege their involvement in the phone hacking of not just the murdered Milly Dowler, but the parents of Holly Wells and Jessica Chapman and victims of the July 7th London bombing.

The esteemed Nicholas Tomalin, said that ‘the only qualities needed for real success in Journalism are ratlike cunning, a plausible manner and a little literary ability.‘ He was not wrong.

It is this cunning that’s got The Guardian’s Nick Davies  the story, as it’s served up insight into the activities that were allegedly common place at the News Of The World.  But let’s not single them out exclusively.  News outlets are in competition with one another and it would be odd to think that they were the only ones guilty.  In fact, In the 2006 ‘What Price Privacy Now?’ report (below) the Information Commission highlighted that 305 journalists had been identified during Operation Motorman as customers driving the illegal trade in confidential personal information.  Have a look at the list and you’ll be surprised by some of the titles that were named and shamed.  The various reports confirm two methods that journalists and private investigators use to get information, including, ‘through corruption, or more usually by some form of deception, generally known as ‘blagging’. Blaggers pretend to be someone they are not in order to wheedle out the information they are seeking.’

What Price Privacy Now Notw

Phone-hacking is really just the tip of the iceberg.  Given that most people do not change the default password on their phone it is pretty easy to intercept voice messages.  But, getting information on addresses, car registration requires deception and/or as the law describes, corruption.

The above report highlights the case of how in November 2006 Stephen and Sharon Anderson of St Ives in Cambridgeshire pleaded guilty to obtaining and selling information unlawfully whilst operating as private investigators.  They used ‘blagging’ techniques to obtain and attempt to obtain personal information about individuals from a number of organisations including Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs, British Telecommunications plc and various banks.

So, while our eyes are currently on The News Of The World, the real question is, what about organisations that private investigators get their data from?  How safe is your data – your bank details, phone numbers, your bills and tax information?  And how ready are these businesses for the questions that must be asked?  If you work PR in-house or agency-side are you ready for the reputation of your client or employer being questioned?  And questions about how safe customers data is?  And today, when we work online, how safe our our emails and our personal profiles?

News Of The World’s official line that it was all down to a ‘rogue reporter’ just did not wash from a public relations perspective.  While it might have held back the criticism, it was like putting a finger in the dam.

Some newsrooms are aggressive places with boiler-room like cultures. You have to get the story. You don’t ask questions about the how, you just need to make sure that all the pieces fit together and that your legal team sign it off.  All of course with the safety net of ‘Public Interest.’  But what is the definition of public interest? And why is the very quiet Press Complaint Commission so neutral?  The PCC’s statement was just pointless.

Carter-Ruck Partner Magnus Boyd says, “public interest is always the justification used for such intrusion. It appears the lack of an adequate definition of public interest has allowed many spurious claims to the public interest.“  He says, “At the moment only Ofcom and the PCC offer working definitions of what is in the public interest and both are deliberately vaugue so as to retain sufficient flexibility and applicability.”

“Conversely, however, the lack of precision in the definition of ‘public interest’ allows the concept to be cited on ‘a rather tired and formulaic basis’ in many cases as Mr Justice Eady noted.  What is interesting to the public may not neceassarily be in the public interest but we can no longer afford to seek to define it by ommission or by the adage, ‘you’ll know it when you see it’.” We need to define what the public interest is in a way that the general public can understand and relate to and which will have sufficient flexibilty to adapt to changing circumstances without being all things to all men”

Talking about celebrity reporting Boyd goes on to explain, “Ironically, celebrity reporting usually requires the least invasive investigation techniques – there are usually people ready to talk off the record and perpetuate the gossip. What may well emerge from recent events is that hacking and blagging were used far more in the investigation of financial and corporate stories than readers may have realised as well as more general news items.”

Up an until The Guardian revealed that the phone of Milly Dowler had been hacked the story seemed distant from the public.  It was an issue that just affected celebrities, people, as some might claim, that courted the media.  But knowing to what lengths certain media outlets would go to has turned the tide.

A social media campaign by the public has been targeting not just readers of the paper but companies that advertise in the News of the World.  Public revulsion is pushing this gossip paper into a tight corner.  Companies like Ford, Mitsubishi, NPower, Virgin Holidays have cut their advertising from the title.

The Daily Telegraph’s Harry Wallop commented on Twitter, ‘NotW makes c£35m from ads + c£135m from sales. Few weeks of dropped ads won’t hit paper hard. Reader loyalty is what matters.’

The community is using Twitter and Facebook to spread their disgust and it’s having an impact, with subscribers to The Sun and other News International cancelling their subscriptions.

Social media can whip-up a storm and highlight public sentiment in real-time.  Give the community and argument and it will express it’s view.  But let’s remember, they are not the only guilty party and PR’s need to be ready for the questions about data, information and privacy that now need to be asked.

****UPDATE***

The Press Complain’s Commission yesterday released a statement that, well, didn’t say much apart from it being unhappy with the conduct of one of it’s members.

In Press Gazette today, Dominic Ponsford highlights how a Independent Enquiry might (we hope) focus on the role of the PCC.

Labour MP Alun Michael, himself a former journalist, speaking in an emergency debate about phone-hacking in the Commons yesterday, said: “The PCC is well meaning, but frankly it’s a joke, the public deserve better and the journalists deserve better. The PCC clearly has neither the will nor the ability to change things. What we need is an independent body, that is robust, effective, and has the powers to investigate and enforce. That would be a major step forward.

Twitter this week launched ‘Twitter for Newsroom‘, an online guide to help those in publishing and journalism understand how best to find sources, verify stories and publish news online.

For many events Twitter has become the stories break, confirming how, as @nicnewman states in a report that news organisations are ‘abandoning attempts to be the first for breaking news, focusing instead on besting the best at verifying and curating it.’  Twitter has become a must-have tool for journalists, enabling them to reach out directly to people caught in the story and who want to share their experience.

All this said, the #TfN guide is very basic and top-line, not adding much value to what we already know.  The announcement highlights more how Twitter is understanding the use of it’s channel by the community as it tries to set some standards and best practice.  The channel has already made public ‘Producers’ guide to Twitter on TV‘ and ‘On-air [TV/Web] display guidelines.’

You just have to look at the case’s of injunctions in the UK of the uprisings in various Middle East countries to see how Twitter and other social networking channels have made the public into individual broadcasters, voices that can add value to a story.  But with so many voices journalists are having to develop a forensic view to enable them to dig through the noise and spin.  It is these skills that add value to journalism.

The announcement this week is a case of how the community is leading and the company is accepting the standards that we are setting.

With the upcoming integrating into Apple’s iOS5 we will see Twitter as a possible default messaging platform for those using Apple products.

Global public relations and communications agency Burson-Marsteller was outted last week by a blogger for planting anti-Google stories for Facebook that would smear the reputation of the search giant.

Blogger Chris Soghoian was approached by Director of Burson-Marsteller’s Washington DC Media Practice John Mercurio to see if he would write an op-ed for a top-tier media outlet that from a PR perspective would further raise awareness of privacy issues surrounding Google’s business.  Soghoian rebuffed Mercurio and published their email correspondence, which was subsequently picked up by The Daily Beast who confirmed that Burson’s client was the social networking mammoth Facebook.

The assignment raises questions not just about the ethics of PR in promoting one set of views over another, but also our industry’s understanding of the media landscape in which it operates.

Let’s not be naïve, assignments such as the one that Burson accepted does take place.  It is part and parcel of what the business world.  Briefings, allegations, misinformation are tactics that while they are crude, are part of certain people’s skill-set.

That said, one of the first questions that needs to be asked is that of why did Facebook deide to or even agreed to a campaign to highlight the failings of a competitor?  Such campaigns, as we have seen, carry a lot or risk and can leave ones reputation severely damaged.  Why didn’t Facebook embark on a communication initiative that would highlight it’s strengths, while ignoring competitors weaknesses.  Strategically the answer lies within Facebook and the counsel it received from Burson-Marsteller.

All this said and knowing about the factitious relationship that exists between these two giants, questions have to be asked about the quality of Burson’s work, an agency that I must declare I did work for in 2008.

The content, structure and tone in the brief email correspondence between the two parties that Soghoian released raise a number of key points and questions:

• Mercurio is Burson-Marsteller’s Director of Media Practice in Washington.
• Mercurio was a former journalist, specialist in politics, who between 2002 and 2005 was CNN’s Political Editor.
• Mercurio’s experience appears to lie within the political sector, certainly this was his sole beat between when he graduated from Boston University with a degree in Journalism and until he left The National Journal as Executive Editor.

Bearing these points in mind and from reading his email exchange with Soghoian one questions why Burson would have Mercurio work on such a project.  Let me highlight the reasons I ask this:

• In Mercurio’s opening email on May 3^rd, John addresses Chris Soghoian as ‘Mr. Soghoian’.  Would a person who had a close working relationship with this blogger address him as ‘Mr’?  Isn’t this quite a detached introduction from somebody who does not have a strong working relationship with said blogger?
• Mercurio is a Burson’s Director of Media with a background in politics, why is he involved in blogger relations?  Surely this would have been the responsibility of a tech team or at least of somebody who would not approach Soghoian with a ‘Mr. Soghoian’.
• While Mercurio offered the opportunity of an op-ed piece, why is it he and not somebody with a better working relationship offering Soghoian this opportunity?
• Why is Burson using email to connect with bloggers, knowing full well that email correspondence can be leaked?

Such work is only successful if there is an element of trust that you can work on.  Approaching bloggers in such a cold manner leaves not just an agency such a Burson-Marsteller open to attack, but also the client who rightly so would expect anonymity.

Mercurio is trained as a journalist, with a background in politics.  Surely he has experience on how to received leaks and how to protect sources.

From a communications perspective the whole operation leaves one questioning not just the suitability of Burson for such an assignment, but the internal understanding of how views and opinions are shaped in a world that is less media-centric.  There will be plenty of internal questions within this prestigious agency given that it isn’t just Facebook’s reputation that’s been damaged.

Facebook, going from strength to strength

Social media and networking channels have during the past year established themselves as the preferred method of communication amongst the varied publics that we interact with.  Facebook, Twitter and Youtube have become part of the mainstream.

Those who at the beginning of 2010 doubted the power of these channels are now active users, even evangelists.  Last year social media was about discovery.  It was about people building up their communities online.  It was about real-time engagement.

This year in 2011 we‘ll see less experimenting and an increase in engagement.  The knowledge that we have as individuals will be pooled and shared within our communities and this in it self will create challenges and opportunities for companies and individuals that we in public relations will be working with.

Communities: engaged and empowered

2010 was about Wikileaks.  Partnering with news outlets around the world including The Guardian, The New York Times and Der Spiegel Wikileaks and it’s community focused on releasing classified material to the media and public.  While the aim of the site when it was set-up in 2006 was to expose ‘oppressive regimes … (and) be of assistance to people of all regions who wish to reveal unethical behaviour in their governments and corporations’ Assange and his associates focused on uncovering political machinations around the world.

What Wikileaks did in 2010 was to light a fuse that will see in the coming year more people consider and question the ethics and values of their employer.  We’ve already had the case of former Julius Bär employee Rudolf Elmer who worked for the bank for over 20 years until his dismissal in 2002.  In a very public press conference at London’s Frontline club Elmer handed over to Wikileaks Julian Assange secret documents detailing the activities of his former employer in the Cayman Island and alleged tax evasion.

Sites such as Wikileaks, Openleaks andTradeleaks will prosper and be a contact point for investigative journalists and campaigning organisations wishing to question the transparency of members of the business community.

We can’t dismiss Wikileaks or what it stands for.  In fact, the publicity generated and the way in which it’s core values have been promoted will have made people, employees in sensitive positions in the corporate and private sector, more willing to leak confidential information.  For many, and not just the hacktivists, Wikileaks is the raison-d’etre it needed.

Media

The media will not die.  News will not disappear.  The fact is social networking is making news consumption as popular as ever.  Half of the problem that media organisations have though is that consumption is not taking place on platforms that publishers control and so monitise.  Research by telecoms operator Orange confirms how ‘14% of people who access the internet on their mobile phones read fewer newspapers as a result,’ before adding that, ‘13 percent said that owning smartphones like the iPhone meant they read more newspaper content online.’ And with Advertising-spend still down media organisations are working hard to find a new business model.

Last year News International started putting its main titles behind a pay-wall, something that other news outlets are watching with hope.  Murdoch is one of the only publishers that can invest in this experiment.  If it works though, and many editors are hoping that it does, then the pay-walls will be going around other titles.

Quality journalism costs money.  It shouldn’t be free.  But getting readers to spend money during a recession will be difficult and it’s because of this that in 2011 we shall see more news outlets releasing apps for mobile devices.  Those that are free will switch to a paid for subscription service.  Paying for content through apps will be a precursor to getting people to pay for quality content online.  The content that is currently free.

Mobile

Mobile is everywhere.  It is the channel that personalises everything we do.  It allows us to update our status, our community, our location, our likes and dislikes.  All this data allows brands to tailor their offerings for more personal approaches.

Why is mobile so important?  Well, over a third of Facebook’s users now access the site through a mobile device.  Twitter meanwhile has also seen a rise of people accessing it through a mobile, with also more than a third of users accessing Twitter via their mobile phone.  Expect this to rise.

Mobile is not just about phones, but also about tablet PCs and the ubiquitous iPad.  Consumers today want content, updated, on demand wherever they are.  Keeping your audiences up to date and up to speed will be central to the work of public relations professionals.  And with the news-cycle crunching down even further reaction times will shorten even further.

Crises only became so when people accessed their desktops at work or home, but with the increase use of mobiles, people will be able to react to issues quicker than ever before.  Listening and engaging will be central to the job of those working in communications.

Of course as the use of smartphones continues to grow and establish itself so will geo-location services like Facebook Places and Foursquare start to take-off.  And with the recession, business will look to use every opportunity available to them to help people part with their hard earned cash.

Content accessible through mobiles will become a must for established organisations and brands.

This year of 2011 will be a key a seminal year in the integration of social media into communications.  It will be a year of communities and engagement.

So Google’s CEO Eric Schmidt has come out and warned that young people will be entitled one day to change their names so that they can escape online and social media activity that’s been recorded and could hinder their future.

The fact that young people or anybody else might need to change their name is not in my opinion what is shocking, but that society would prejudge people based on what they might have got-up to during their youth.

It’s an astonishing claim from Google, given the amount of data that they cache.

Danny Dover’s recent SEOmoz.org blog post - The Evil Side of Google? Exploring Google’s User Data Collection - gives you an idea of what search engines such as Google have stored.  I would recommend that you read his post to get a clear understanding of how vulnerable reputations have become.  And why are they so vulnerable?  Well, the fact that people are sharing information makes the net a great place for data mining for investigative journalists.

Let’s remember the case of Stuart MacLennan, a prospective Labour candidate, who before seeking nomination to stand for Labour in Moray referred to pensioners as “coffin dodgers”, the common’s speaker John Bercow as a “opportunist little twat” and referring to Fairtrade he demanded a “slave-grown, chemically enhanced, genetically modified” banana.  Of course he didn’t say this in person, but Tweeted it to his followers some time before he sought the Labour party’s nomination.  Needless to say that it was a journalist who unveiled his comments, which led to the then Prime Minster Gordon Brown to sack him.  So, should he change his name?  Possibly not because in politics nearly everything is forgiven.

With social networking having taken a front seat in the way in which we communicate the watchword for managing a reputation is something that would have sounded odious some time ago.  That word is self-censorship, something that in ‘pluralistic’ countries happens just to conform to the expectations of the wider community.

The big question is my opinion is whether social media will makes us more tolerant or more authoritarian?

And for those who might be using lawyers to get libellous content removed from a web-site, while lawyers can enforce an order on the hosting company, getting the cache-trail cleaned up is a different question all together.

Sky News Studio

Sky News made the headlines in March 2009 when it appointed a Twitter correspondent to scour the real-time platform ‘for stories’ and give Sky News a presence on the Twittersphere.  At the time Guardian writer Jemima Kiss said that she was “in two minds about the creation of a Twitter Correspondent.”

An internal Sky News memo obtained by Techcrunch at the time highlighted how the editorial team saw that news stories were breaking on Twitter thanks to users who eye-witnessed stories and then reported them to their followers.  Ruth Barnett, who today is the channel’s Online Politics Producer, was chosen as their Twitter correspondent.

I meet with Sky News Executive Editor Chris Birkett earlier this week, who confirmed that searching for news on Twitter and other social media platforms is now part of every journalist’s remit at Sky News.  I asked Chris about the impact that social media’s had on its newsgathering and content promotion operation.

Birkett said that their web and online team are responsible amongst other things for verifying content sent in to the newsroom through social media channels.  Birkett added that the number of users accessing Sky News online was being challenged by those who got the outlets news through their social media feeds.

Sky News Executive Editor Chris Birkett

Today the Sky News website has an audience reach of c.7.5 million unique users – 3.3 million in Europe and a further 4.2 million in other markets around the world.  Their iPhone app has been downloaded 2 million times, with Birkett confirming a “massive rise in users accessing the site through mobile devices,” something that is encouraging the news outlet to make it’s app available on other platforms, such Android, which recently announced it supported flash video.

Birkett noted that 18,000 people watched the Sky News Leader’s Debate from their smartphone.  We were also shown the development room where they were testing their forthcoming iPad app.

The one disappointment from a mobile aspect was that while the iPhone app has the facility for users to send in user generated content (ugc) the numbers have not yet excited editorial staff.  ‘Not yet’ being the watchword.

Asked if Sky News had benefited from The Times and Sunday Times paywall Birkett said that there didn’t appear to be a surge in traffic, which leaves one to question where Times Online users gone to?  Birkett did say though that Sky News has 650 staff – a lot less than the BBC, 500 of which are at the Sky News Centre and of which 150 are journalists.  The Times and Sunday Times meanwhile have dedicated 700 journalists, allowing the Wapping titles to provide the in-depth comment and analysis while Sky News focus on short video.

We are looking forward to another visit and further insight from Sky News.

Gordon Brown with head in hands after "bigoted woman" gaffe.

Last week Prime Minister Gordon Brown said about the election during the #leadersdebate that, “if it was all about style and PR, count me out.” The fact is that after his walkabout meeting with Rochdale pensioner Gillian Duffy it is PR, or lack of it, that highlights that he is stumbling along the election stump.

The chance encounter with Gillian Duffy was a meeting that Labour insiders were hoping for – a meeting with real and ordinary voters. The problem arose not during the robust questioning by Duffy, which in my opinion turned out positive, but how he perceived the meeting went. It was comments that he made in his car and which were picked up by a live microphone that might have derailed the Labour Party’s efforts during this general election.

Media channels and the online community on Twitter wasted no time in making the most out of the comments from a lady who at the end of his meeting with Brown described herself as a life-long Labour voter that would vote for the Prime Minister. After she heard the comments, he decision changed.

While PR gaffes like this do happen, in such situations they can be critical. It would be interesting to see how Gordon’s spin-doctors try to turn this around. I say this as Lord Mandelson is on the BBC News Channel giving his view on the event as part of a “damage limitation” exercise.

Of course, you can judge for yourself how he fared up and until he got in his car on the Channel 4 footage below.

UPDATE: News reaches us that after his BBC Radio 2 interview with Jeremy Vine, Brown jumped in the car and returned to Rochdale to apologise to Gillian Duffy.  We should remember that after learning how Gillian had been described by the Prime Minister she said to journalists that she did not want to see or meet him again.  That decision though has been taken away from her as Brown has been at her house for over 30 minutes.

The Chartered Institute of Public Relation’s announced today that it has brought together some of the UK’s most eminent social media thinkers “to provide input into the Institute’s policy guidance, education and training.”

Led by CIPR Board Member and Stainforth MD Rob Brown the advisory board is charged with looking at the impact of social media on “online reputation developments, convergence in marketing communications and best practice social media measurement.”

CIPR President Jay O’Connor said: “A core theme in our three-year strategic plan is social media and the impact on the public relations profession.  Rob joined the CIPR board to lead our efforts in this area, feeding into our policy, research and training.  As part of this, Rob has set up the Social Media Panel – a group of some of the UK’s foremost social media contributors, who will debate and input, ensuring our guidance reflects the very best thinking and practice.

“Things are moving quickly. Reaching out to practitioners who can offer their insight so that we can guide our members and the profession appropriately is key.”

Members of the advisory board include:

• Daljit Bhurji ACIPR – Managing Director, Diffusion (@Daljit_Bhurji)
• Mark Borkowski  – Managing Director, Borkowski (@MarkBorkowski)
• Rob Brown FCIPR – Managing Director, Staniforth (@robbrown)
• Stuart Bruce MCIPR – Managing Director, Wolfstar (@stuartbruce)
• Dominic Burch – Head of Corporate Communications, ASDA (@dom_asdaPR)
• Simon Collister – Head of Non-Profit and Public Sector, We Are Social (@simoncollister)
• Gemma Griffiths – Client Director, Racepoint (@GemGriff)
• Katy Howell – Managing Director, Immediate Future (@katyhowell)
• Marshall Manson – Director of Digital Strategy, Edelman (@marshallmanson)
• Beccy McMichael – Head of Corporate & Technology, Ruder Finn (@bmcmichael)
• Danny Rogers – Editor, PR Week (@dannyrogers2001)
• Julio Romo MCIPR – PR and Communications Consultant, twofourseven (@twofourseven)
• Philip Sheldrake – Partner, Influence Crowd LLP (@sheldrake)
• Stephen Waddington MCIPR – Managing Director, Speed Communications (@wadds)
• Robin Wilson – Director Digital PR & Social Media, McCann Erickson (@robin1966)

You can keep up to date with debates and developments by following the #ciprsm hashtag.