Today marks the debut of Brands In Public. The site is launched by Squidoo and Seth's post today provides a great overview of what the site is and how it works. The idea is basically that brands cannot control what's being said about them... but with Brands in Public they can organize the discussions: highlight and confirm the good, respond to and address the not so good.
Each brand has a page like this. Right now there are only several hundred pages but eventually Brands In Public will feature thousands of pages of brands. The right hand side of a brand's page will be made up of the conversations currently circulating about the brand while the left hand side is available for marketers to purchase and then control. This creates a two-way discussion, on multiple topics, all on one page.
What a great idea. I look forward to seeing this develop.
I also think it's very needed today...
I recently came across a fascinating study on PsyBlog that discussed, "Do we believe everything we read?" Historically, there have been two theories: 1) That understanding and believing are two separate processes (argued by Rene Descartes) and 2.) That understanding is believing but then we can change our minds when we come across evidence to the contrary (argued by Baruch Spinoza).
Like it or not, the study confirmed #2. We can't help ourselves... We tend to believe what we read (blogs, news, commentary, etc.) until we find evidence to the contrary.
This is why it's important to introduce things like Brands In Public. It's a place to host both sides of a discussion so that people can quickly and easily make up their own minds about a brand once they observe both sides of a story.