On its face, the letters-to-the-editor feature makes no sense. Every day, newspapers invite people to complain about the company's effort, so that the news organization can print and distribute those grievances to customers. It's kind of like McDonald's running notes on Happy Meals bags from customers who are angry that french fries and Chicken McNuggets make kids fat.

The idea behind letters is this: People will trust the newspaper more if they see that it is willing to share criticisms of its work with the public.

I'm not sure there's ever been scientific research on whether it works. But newspapers everywhere have bought into the concept as the right thing to do. Besides, readers expect the feature to run and would complain if it didn't.

Today, whether they like it or not, the whole commercial world is adopting and adapting to the letters approach.

Corporations and their products are being praised and slammed on company websites that invite customers to describe their experiences. The same chatter has become a staple of countless blogs, consumer websites and email distribution networks that are totally outside the control of those companies being discussed.

And unlike newspaper letters, online comments are much more numerous, varied and lacking in restraint. Issues of fairness -- even libel in some cases -- are not discussed before these missives are published online.

On Sunday, the Boston Globe had an interesting piece about the phenomenon. The article was tied to research done by Josh Bernoff and Charlene Li at Forester Research Inc. and their book, "Groundswell -- Winning in a World Transformed by Social Technologies."

The question has become this: How can corporations control their message at a time when competitors, gadflies, disgruntled employees, customers and anybody else with an opinion can communicate their take on things to the world?

In politics, presidential candidate Barack Obama set up a special website to combat Internet-fueled rumors. And in the corporate world, some businesses are working hard to grab the attention of Web users and shape their thoughts.

Lego, for example, created its Lego Ambassadors site, so fans would have a place to discuss what they like about the toy bricks and rally in support of the company. These ambassadors are expected to take that message to other locations on the Web and in their real-world communities.

Viral communication, through email and social networking sites, is today's "word of mouth" advertising. It's also word of mouth that has been bitten by a radioactive spider. Rumors, facts without context and misimpressions can circulate around the world like wildfire, as they are distributed exponentially to more people each day.

No business has time to make Web chatter and gossip its focus. The old standbys of marketing and public relations -- media relations, advertising, customer outreach, networking, event organizing, etc. -- are still king.

Still, it wasn't all that long ago that people said that the Web itself was something that organizations could afford to mostly ignore, since the majority of sales still came through bricks-and-mortar stores or direct mail.

Businesses can't ignore the word on the Web any more than they can ignore the word on the street.

E-mail this entry to a friend