Should biotechs stake out real estate in the blogosphere? This question came up at a media panel I attended yesterday in Delaware, hosted by the Delaware BioScience Association. Towards the end of the session, our moderator, Lee Marshall of Business Wire, posed that question to Gary Haber of The News Journal in Wilmington, Pam Murphy of Incyte, and me.

Marshall handed me the microphone first, and I couldn't help but stammer a bit - what's the answer? Blogs are a novel form of communication, one that people - myself included - don't quite understand yet. But their power is undeniable: Many media outlets, including The Scientist, have switched news coverage from "news stories" to "blogs." Several blogs have become my favorite sources of online information, and I check them practically everyday.

But would I, or anyone for that matter, read a blog hosted by a private company? Would biotechs benefit from establishing relationships with bloggers as another means of communicating important corporate developments?

Certainly, blogging is something that every sector, including biotech, should pay close attention to. But when you're dealing with biotech, there is such a thing as bad press. So my instinct is that blogging may not be the avenue for corporate communicators to pursue, given that many bloggers, by definition, tend to be fairly anti-establishment, and more interested in writing about what companies don't want people to say. I can't imagine a blog running a corporate press release, or praising a generic statement from a CEO.

Think I'm wrong? Let me know.