I like David Jones’ take on this because it’s directly to the point: Social media involves a conversation of some sort. A blog is part of the social media umbrella (that is, if it has open comments; if not, then it’s just another way to post a one-sided story).

If your client isn’t ready to have conversations with people, they shouldn’t be using social media tools, period.

Dave – good analogy with calling the CEO’s office. Maybe it comes down to the fact that blogs aren’t like opeds, press release quotes or books because they are a conversation. That is, I can leave a comment and expect that the real person is writing back.

Then again, even letters are a form of conversation and few letters of response from a Prime Minister or a bank chairman are actually written by the guys who sign them.

It’s certainly an interesting issue to debate. For another perspective, see keithmcarthur.ca. Dave Fleet has responded where I cross-posed this topic on that site.

Here’s why.

Without getting all treacly about it, I believe that blogs are currently a proxy for a personal conversation between author and reader/commenter. A speech isn’t a conversation and neither is a news release.

If I phone up a CEO, I expect the person on the phone is actually the CEO that I’m talking to. They’d probably ask how I got their number, but still, I’d expect it to actually be the CEO. I don’t think a CEO would allow someone else to impersonate them on a phone call, so why do it on a blog?

I think it’s important when thinking of ghostblogging to ask…
–Can I trust this person?
–Am I specific about the topics I wish covered?
–Does the ghostblogger source for informational posts?
–Should I allow the ghostblogger to op-ed in my name? (there is a big difference between an op-ed blog and an informational blog)