Posts Tagged ‘Facebook’

1. Loose lips sink ships and so can Twitter

   Published on Friday, June 17th, 2011
   Today we learned of the All Blacks new social media policy, dubbed ‘online is offside’. In an attempt to avoid competitive leaks and unnecessary distraction, our players have now been banned from personal tweets during the Rugby World Cup.

   Are such social media boundaries a bit extreme, or are they much-needed and well overdue? And where did our common sense go with all this newfound reach?

   Overseas, it seems they’re facing the same problem establishing boundaries for social media usage. The UK defence force has just launched an advertising campaign that reminds family and friends of servicemen in combat zones to watch what they say on social networks such as Twitter and Facebook.

   Meanwhile Senator Weiner has learnt the power of a tweet pic having naively tried to blame hackers for his online philandering, and UK juror Joanne Fraill is serving an eight month jail term after discussing deliberations with the defendant on Facebook.

   They’ve learnt the hard way (although it seems obvious), that no longer do snoops need to scour through rubbish bins, peep through windows or listen at doors, when they can just view a Twitter feed or ‘Facebook stalk’.

   While common sense is the first rule of thumb for all communication, it’s also clear that not everyone applies it to tweets and statuses. Just as we wouldn’t sit in a crowded room sharing sensitive information or making inappropriate personal comments (well we shouldn’t) – why do some people think it is okay to do it online?

   All Blacks Cory Jane and Neemia Tialata have already been told off by management for tweeting back in 2009 about their non-selection to face England more than 24 hours before the team was officially announced. It seems that even sports stars are guilty of assuming that the normal rules of confidentiality and ethics don’t apply when using social media.

   Perhaps some of these rather obvious examples will remind people just how accessible our thoughts are when posted online. Mainstream and major media journalists are quoting Twitter updates in news stories, and Sh*t My Dad Says, a popular Twitter feed based on a father’s thoughts and rants, has been turned into a television sitcom starring William Shatner.

   On the other hand, we mustn’t let the potential risks or a lack of boundaries undermine faith in the value of using Twitter. Just as we take a thoughtful approach to using traditional media, we must do the same online. Our interface with the Fourth Estate continues to evolve and so too will our interface with these newer social media channels.

   Others will be talking about you but what you really need is them to talk with you. If you are not part of the initial conversation, when you do have something to say, you probably won’t be heard or you’ll lack the authority to be taken seriously.

   So how ever you use it, always remember that loose lips can sink ships, but tweets could sink a whole lot more.

2. Should governments have the right to censor Facebook?

   Published on Thursday, July 22nd, 2010
   Major tragedies are usually followed by a host of different reactions and responses. These are frequently played out in public as individuals try to connect with other like-minded people to affirm their own reaction to a situation. Naturally the online world offers many forums in which to do this.

   Most recently, British PM David Cameron came under fire for demanding a Facebook tribute page in memory of gunman Raoul Moat, named “RIP Raoul Moat you legend”, be taken down. The creator claimed the page was not to “condone what he did, as what he did was wrong. [I] Feel sorry for the families, but he was still a human being at the end of the day. He had problems and he didn’t get any help.”

   Despite this explanation, David Cameron condemned the page, categorically stating that he could not understand any sympathy towards this man. The UK government directly contacted Facebook and its creator, Mark Zuckerberg, asking that the page be taken down. 

   Facebook’s initial respone was that it is a “place where people can express their views and discuss things in an open way …as such there were times when people discussed topics others sometimes found distasteful. However, this is not a reason in itself to stop a debate from happening.”  So long as Facebook’s terms and conditions were not violated, the social media giant felt there was no case to answer to.

   Eventually the creator herself backed down, presumably in light of the outrage across the UK, and taking down the page earlier this week. 

   On one level, it seemed to me that David Cameron is possibly naïve in his belief that a government has the right to censor public opinion, and to do so in such a public way potentially has future ramifications. On the other they are representing the interests of their people, and when the brutal actions of one person look as though they are being celebrated, surely they can and should look to shut down that particular discussion.

   But Facebook also has a point. There are any number of distasteful and immoral topics being discussed on the internet and through social media even as you read this. Where is the line to be drawn? What if a corporation’s facebook page had negative messages written on it? Does the fact they have a Facebook page mean they are open to comments and criticism, or should they have the option to decide what is posted on their ‘wall’?

   How do we protect people’s right to free speech while ensuring it doesn’t result in the unreasonable victimisation or stigamitisation of others – be it an individual, brand, or an organisation?

3. Can Social Media Turn the Tide for the Obama Administration?

   Published on Thursday, June 17th, 2010
   Ariana Huffington, Editor in Chief and Co-Founder of the self-named Huffington Post, wrote an interesting piece last week on how the US government is looking to develop social media channels to enable the public to be more closely involved in the decision-making processes of government. 

   Possibly it’s part of the Obama Adminstration’ s move to address concerns that Pres. Obama is not hearing what the people want. But it is also a sign of their very real understanding of the need to integrate modern communication mechanisms into the traditional communications mix.  
    
   The Obama administration’s appointment of the first ever Chief Information Officer demonstrates its awareness that this space should be developed, managed and protected, just as any other major piece of the nations infrastructure needs to be handled. So perhaps this next move will in fact highlight some of the underlying traps that businesses currently face.

   Presumably with access to the best tech brains in the US to help refine and fashion social media as an effective communication channel, the outcomes should be very interesting.
    
   While the premise of public input into law making via the news channels is  refreshing, almost inevitably there is a high risk of issues being captured by lobby groups who may use such  anonymous forums as a way of promoting their version of what  real Jo Public thinks  – which may not be correct. On the other hand, any such attempts at manipulation may be so obvious as to not be an issue, and the forum will prove to be a more modern means of truly allowing public participation in government. 
    
   Delivery of, and access to information through technology is an area that potentially requires a whole new set of guidelines, regulations and laws. Undoubtedly they will come and offset the wild-west dimension to what some people continue say and do in the new media. Examples abound of rogue sites, blogs and facebook postings. Here’s hoping that an initiative by a really tech savvy government will create some outcomes that will prove beneficial for the rest of the world.

4. Rewriting the crisis management template

   Published on Friday, April 30th, 2010
   Corporations not convinced of the role that social media can play in crisis or issues management communication need only study its role during the recent Iceland volcanic eruption to change their position totally.

   As you read this, the template for managing a crisis is being rewritten.

   In the recent airline crisis, experienced as a result of the Icelandic volcano eruption, twitter proved itself a frontline communication tool, sitting alongside the more traditional first responses such as call centres, hotlines and websites.

   According to Mashable, The Social Media Guide, the use of twitter during the crisis started as a self help tool among stranded travellers.

   Also immediately, airline communicators picked up on what was happening, and started to update flight status and provide service information on twitter through hashtags (devices for tracking specific topics). This initiative alone was credited with taking a significant level of pressure off call centres that were close to being overwhelmed.

   The more innovative airlines extended their initiatives down into their Facebook pages, providing general information and also engaging in one-on-one real-time conversations with customers, including seeking to re-book stranded passengers on alternative flights.

   Meanwhile, back on twitter the public started to lend a hand to stranded travellers – offering rides, places to stay and food.

   If you want a more detailed overview of social media’s role in the crisis please click here.

   The key learning to emerge from this for those involved in crisis management is the need to include in the management plan an important role for social media.

   A significant proportion of the public instinctively look to twitter and Facebook for information, and as communicators we need to reach out to our audiences, rather than require them to come to us.

5. Transparency of TMI

   Published on Friday, November 6th, 2009
   There is a fascinating story in today’s National Business Review about some alleged liquidation hi-jinks. Basically it is about the suitability of a parade of possible liquidators, but our interest is not in the substance of story but the issue of over-disclosure.

   The story notes that one of apparent liquidators, in a series of them, was one Melissa Watson. It went on to state that not only was Ms Watson unqualified for the role, she could not be impartial. The grounds for the lack of partiality being she was one of three friends of the person whose building was being put into liquidation, Brent Clode.

   The alleged source of this friendship?  Mr Clode’s page on the social networking website Facebook!

   This raises a number of questions, like:  what is the status of your relationship if you are not featured on the Facebook page of someone you know well; if you are not on Facebook, do you have any friends, or does anyone care about your friends; and, is Facebook a form of over-disclosure, or plain honest transparency?

   This story does illustrate the TMI-factor of social networks.

6. Don’t put all your eggs in one basket

   Published on Monday, August 10th, 2009
   Social networking sites Twitter and Facebook have been hacked, and much to the consternation of millions of users it’s not the first time the online giants have had their security tested and found wanting.

   Facebook now has over 250 million users and Twitter is snapping at its heels in terms of numbers of registered users. Both social media platforms have become pivotal channels for many organisations to reach out to staff or customers for work, play and the sharing of information.

   Twitter is shrugging off this most recent official hacking, but the breach occurred in the most basic of ways. A hacker guessed an employees password to a personal email account and then simply stole confidential company information and crashed the service.

   According to the Weekend Herald motives for denial-of-service attacks range from political to rabble-rousing to extortion, with criminal groups increasingly threatening to hobble popular websites that do not pay demanded fees, security experts told Reuters.

   These attacks raise some salient points for companies, marketers and communicators.

   First off, never neglect basic web hygiene by maintaining strong passwords that use a combination of letters and numbers, and keep security up-to-date.

   Second, as cloud computing (the fast growing trend of storing data online ) becomes the norm and social networking sites are entrenched as an integral part of business to business communication, then a back-up to these occasionally unstable and vulnerable platforms needs to be part of the plan.

   And last, aside from ensuring that contacts are saved and stored, don’t abandon real time, personal relationships and keep your brand alive and visible in the real world. 

   The lesson from this recent hacking incident is don’t put all your eggs in one basket.

7. One size – sometime its meant to fit, others not

   Published on Tuesday, July 14th, 2009
   Currently the actions of some bloggers and existing media law appear to be incompatible.

   The Crown Law Office has received several complaints relating to coverage of the Clayton Weatherston case. The much-read Kiwiblog has taken down a thread on the case, and David Farrar says he will no longer post comments during trial.

   A Facebook site on the same topic is also under investigation. Some of the group’s near-700 members have been posting comments about murder-accused Weatherston, and the site’s originator believes it is his right to freely express his views.

   In this age of electronic conversations it seems that clear boundaries need to be established around the right of bloggers to use the internet to disseminate information that could possible influence a jury.

   University of Otago law professor Mark Henaghan is completely clear:  “We’ve pussyfooted around blogging too much – it is part of communication.” Any interference with court proceedings is contempt of court.

   The mainstream media are vigilant not to breach the law for reason of costs and credibility, but these realities appear not to extend to the far corners of the internet – not yet.  Perhaps the costs of prosecution could clear up any ambiguities up very quickly.

   When it come to justice there has be one size for all.

   This of course is not the rule for dispute simmering at the top of the South island over iconic bach architecture versus squatter hovels.

   In the 40’s and 50’s these unpretentious little dwellings sprung up along the coastline, often constructed cheaply and cheerfully from surplus materials.

   Currently eight of these baches sit on a strip of public land in Tasman’s Ligar Bay, mere metres from the shore.  Depending on your point of view they’ve variously been described in the community as a ‘blight’ and ‘hovels’ or architectural icons.

   As March 2014 looms the 25 year land leases are running down. But their owners’ campaign to save them is gearing up.

   If the benchmark for the bach or beach house is a faux Tuscan Palazzo, then the these will never do. But on the other hand they do make a statement about our history, about who were are or at least who we were.

   Unlike the rigours court reporting, when it comes to our architecture perhaps there is room for a range of viewpoints?

8. The new art of conversation

   Published on Wednesday, May 6th, 2009
   By now you should all know that social media is the new art of conversation.  Billions of people around the globe are using social media tools to converse, collaborate and share information every day.

   So Network PR’s team of consultants gathered on a cool autumn evening at the Gow Langsford Gallery for The Social Network to do our own conversing, collaborating and information sharing with key influencers shaping this new conversation landscape.

   Surrounded by the ethereal art of Tim Maguire, a mix of the traditional and new media, bloggers, reporters, TV personalities, producers and tech-geeks from across the realms of NZ media got together to mingle and talk Twitter.

   Social media strategist Stephen Collins shared his thoughts around the power of social media – “half the planet is connected to social media – it’s an important and powerful space to understand and be a part of“.  He highlighted that social networking tools such as Facebook, Flickr and Twitter did not exist five years ago which begs the question, what’s next?

   Evolving Newsroom blogger and former Telegraph journalist Julie Starr talked about where journalism fits in to the new information era saying that “social media offers a new way of thinking for information; its about timing, accurate and relevant information about the world around us”.

   It was an enjoyable evening highlighting that traditional means of building relationships and communicating with each other remain vitally important; however we need to learn to embrace the new.

   For me personally, I like the way that social media lets me re-connect with friends I haven’t seen for eight years who live on the other side of the world.  I like the way that it provides me with different, new and exciting information every day.

   So Kiwi businesses, if you want to be heard, whether it’s a story, a new product or an idea why not get on board the social media express and master the new art of conversation.

   In the meantime, you can check out our fabulous event video here:

   www.youtube.com/watch?v=QPKlh76IRW0&feature=channel_page

9. 21st Century Prohibition – Managing the modern day Pandora’s box

   Published on Friday, April 3rd, 2009
   As I write this post my Twitter profile is minimised, I’ve checked my Facebook at least twice today, researched articles on-line and watched a couple of items from last night’s TV news – a normal day in the life of a PR professional. For many the internet is an essential tool. But it can also have a dark side (and I don’t mean the vast amounts of R rated content). It can seduce you into spending far more time surfing than you initially intended and decrease productivity and focus.

   One survey suggests that personal internet usage at work accounts for 25% of all browsing while others have put it closer to a staggering two thirds of browsing time. Like Pandora’s box the temptation to look inside and see what’s new is irresistible especially when you have a case of 3.30-itis.

   So how can we balance the benefits with the down-sides? How can we ensure it doesn’t eat at productivity and organisational performance? Strict rules and bans are probably not the right approach for most organisations. If people want to spend their time surfing the net and avoiding work it is likely there are bigger issues than internet access. The tone of an organisation is likely to change when there are strict bans enforced. People who want to slack off can find plenty of other ways – txting and emailing for example.

   In our organisation the work-home blur means there is frequent overlap. Media calls and releases late at night are balanced by the ability to dispatch personal matters through the course of your work day. The ability to quickly deal with a pesky bill payment or booking on-line can prevent that nagging distraction in your workload and allow you to focus on the job at hand. That free thinking time to surf and trawl can result in new ideas or spark creative inspiration for a campaign you may be working on. In setting your internet usage guidelines you need to ensure it fits with the culture and professional requirements of your workplace.

   As communicators we are self-regulating. On the other hand it has been suggested recently at TVNZ that sites such as Facebook and TradeMe be blocked during work hours. The thinking behind this was cutting bandwidth costs. As they are communicators as well, is this conducive to business in the media sector?

   

10. Mad about Copyright

    Published on Monday, March 9th, 2009
    The new Copyright Act was all set to come into effect on February 28, but just a few weeks shy of that date an on-line campaign was waged that saw government call timeout and stop the Act becoming law.

    Regardless of your position on Section 92A, the approach taken by the on-line community is one to learn from.  It was unique in its effectiveness and in outcome, but most of all its speed. The campaign demonstrates the power of on-line communities – both as a friend and foe.

    The so-called ‘Guilt upon Accusation’ clause caused the storm in a laptop for many in online and artistic communities.  Section 92A of the Act provided for Internet Service Providers to cut users web access on suspicion of a breach of copyright, and this was at the heart of issue. The strategy to get their views heard was very simple. The community opposed to section 92A blacked out their online avatars on social networking sites Facebook and Twitter. The idea, inspired by an All Blacks supporters call for fans to switch their avatars to silver ferns, was proposed by web developer Brenda Wallace at an un-conference held February 15.

    Come the following Monday morning the ‘blackout’ news was spreading and the lights went out all over the internet. Web influencer and twitter-er extraordinaire Stephen Fry weighed in and turned his picture black in a bold signal to his 250,000 followers.

    The opposition movement to Section 92A gained momentum, those motivated to lend support or find out more, crashed blog sites. The mainstream media here and internationally suddenly sat up and took notice. Scores of news items, from a range of viewpoints, appeared across all media. There ensued an unprecedented amount of coverage for what is really a dry, complex and niggly piece of legislation.

    Within eight days from conception to completion the ‘blackout’ campaign organisers had made their way to John Key’s office and the law was suspended.

    This campaign showed how an issue can now move at lightening speed, across countries, organisations and traditional groupings.  It is also a reminder to companies how, with the speed of new media, they can have a major issue on their hands before even being aware it exists.  The solution lies in keeping in touch with all critical audiences both on-line and off-line.