23-year-old James Coleman became the ‘first man in Britain to suffer a 'twinjury' - an injury sustained while using Twitter’, according to today’s Telegraph.
One might wonder how the Telegraph got their hands on such a gem of a story. 24-hour Twitter monitoring?
Actually, after some serious investigative journalism (typing his name into Google), it appears Mr Coleman isn’t a stranger to the world of national news. In fact, he works at 'press, PR and market research specialists' 72 Point.
Mystery solved!
I work in PR - yes, but Twitter arent one of our clients. And I'd have to be pretty sad to smack my head into a branch in order to publicise a brand which we don't even work for.
I think that would be a new PR-low, self-harming for the sake of publicity. Publicity which Twitter doesn't even need.
And negative publicity at that - look what Twitter can do to you.
Posted by: James Coleman | June 01, 2009 at 04:25 PM
If that’s a PR stunt it’s not very good PR for Twitter is it?
Posted by: James Darcy | June 01, 2009 at 04:39 PM
Nice!
I wonder if the Telegraph thought to ask which office this 'office worker' is based in? And whether it would negate any validity the story had in their minds if they knew he worked for the company who sold in this photo story?
After all, it's probably best not to ask too many questions, especially if the story looks too good to be true.
Though, he could just have had an accident of course and his bosses thought it newsworthy. It's far from out of the question. And it's quite possible The Telegraph knew he worked for 72 Point but still agreed it was a good news story anyway.
Either way, good work by South West News and 72 Point. Nice hit (the coverage, rather than the tree branch!)
Posted by: Will Sturgeon | June 01, 2009 at 04:51 PM
Why did you even Google him to find he worked in PR...just read his Twitter updates.
If he is hiding the fact he works in PR then he is doing a terrible job at it.
Posted by: Kevin Jones | June 01, 2009 at 05:04 PM
You guys must be so proud of yourselves. No really, well done. You found someone's job title by Googling. Christ. A job on the Daily Telegraph's investigations team beckons. By the way, a bloke fell off his bike in the High Street today. Get your ace team of journos to find out what he does for a living too will you. I can't wait to read your dull-as-dishwasher blog tomorrow (yawn). By the way, I'm a web designer. There you go, I saved your four hours work tomorrow. Idiots.
Posted by: Jay Edgington | June 01, 2009 at 08:27 PM
At least it's nice to know some people know a story when it slaps them in the face.
Posted by: Guy Radcliffe | June 02, 2009 at 12:03 AM
Despite Jay's eloquent rebuttal, I actually think this is interesting.
And those people suggesting this could have been some kind of PR stunt for a brand named in the story are entirely missing the point. I don't think that's why this was flagged at all.
The guy in the story works for the company who sold in the story to the Telegraph. And I'm guessing that may not have been made clear at the time.
Even *if* the story is true and that black-eye is genuine, which isn't even the issue here, I think the story's provenance is too flimsy to be run with any credibility by the quality press.
If he was a plummer in Scotland who'd never heard of South West News or 72 Point I'd say fair enough, it's just a quirky story sold in by somebody looking for a fast buck from an overstretched news team.
But he isn't, he works for them and they profited, either directly or indirectly by selling in this story to The Telegraph.
I don't think anybody's suggesting James does PR for Twitter (though I'd argue 'I'm so addicted to Twitter, I even do it while I jog' *is* a good story) or even BlackBerry (nice pic of their device in The Telegraph).
It's the connection between the source of the story and the subject of the story which has doubtless piqued the interests of the cynics and those who expect a little more scrutiny from journalists.
To James's second point, I suspect those same cynics are almost certainly not suggesting he actually ran into a branch at anybody's request.
But ultimately it's a job well done by SWNS and 72 Point, and a bit of a black mark against The Telegraph's quality control.
To everybody's overarching sentiment though, there are more important things going on in the world.
Apparently some chap fell off his bicycle on the High Street, near Jay yesterday.
Posted by: Ian Wilson | June 02, 2009 at 08:59 AM
I have summised from previous postings that you guys believe two things 1. That no-one who works in PR either has or is permitted to have an accident of any sort at any time in their lives.
2. That if that someone, who happens to work for a extremely large media organisation, is unfortunate enough to have a daft accident which is newsworthy because it involves Twitter, they should not mention it to anyone at the parent company?????
Perhaps we should apply that principle to our police forces. It's okay to report and investigate crimes when you are working - but if you are off and see something, you should turn a blind eye in case you are villified by your peers for doing so?
James was slightly red-faced over it but we thought it was a funny story. And we were right, non?
Posted by: news guru | June 02, 2009 at 10:16 AM
Interesting points New Guru, but I'm not sure any of us should compare what we do to the police force - could look as though we take ourselves a little bit too seriously.
I assume you guys told The Telegraph that James worked for you, so I don't see what the problem is. It was a throwaway story. Let's all move on.
I like the blog redesign by the way Lewis. And I assume stirring up a little controversy on the day you relaunched the blog was as coincidental as James working for South West News? ;-)
You're all playing the same game.
Posted by: Chris | June 02, 2009 at 11:02 AM