2012 – The year of the Tweeting Twit

Let’s all be honest, when celebrities first got on Twitter, fearlessly spouting forth from the round table of life, it was quite satisfying to see the occasional fall from grace in the form of an all too honest tweet. Twitter, quite expertly liberalised us from the age of publicity-vetted blandness - note @RupertMurdoch’s most recent tirade against Obama and Google recently blogged about here. However, it would appear that politicians too are falling victim to stupidity’s tendency to go viral! 

Yes, it’s been a bit of a false start to the Olympic year for some of Britain’s more politically motivated Twitterati! There’s been a triple entente of 140 character social media faux pas’ already, ending in nationwide trending hash tags - effectively a mass digital sniggering from the online populace.

So strike one: Diane Abbot (@HackneyAbbott) tweets, “'White people love playing 'divide & rule. We should not play their game #tacticasoldascolonialism.” With racial tension resurfacing amidst the Stephen Lawrence murder trial, it’s safe to say @HackneyAbbott was justifiably the first tweeting twit of the year.

Strike two: You’d think the calls for Abbott to resign after her 140 character fail would have resulted in slightly more diligent proofreading. At the very least the party leader would make sure the messages he pushed through the channel were fitting. Well, no. Ed Miliband (or someone in his digital team) let loose a rather inconvenient Freudian slip in a tweeted tribute to Bob Holness. Safe to say, Bob won’t be fondly remembered for ‘Blackbusters.’ Tweeting twit number two.

Strike three: MP Tom Harris, the Labour party’s ‘social media guru’ or ‘Twitter tsar’ (these titles are already open to debate after strike’s one and two) tweets a Downfall parody of SNP leader Alex Salmond and is forced to resign. If there is a no go area in UK politics it is Mein Führer. You’d think a social guru would have been aware of the parameters within which to operate such digital prowess. At least we found the source of the problem - tweeting wit number three.

Fact of the matter is, these are all fairly regular, minor gaffes (bar the Hitler one from MP Tom Harris, that was plain idiotic), but with quite large repercussions online. Quite simply, when you’re something of a someone on social media the key is to remember that age old adage and ‘think before you tweet.’

‘Clarkson-like' comments and the social web

Two weeks ago it was the charming antics of a delinquent dog that caused a hashtag storm on Twitter. Last week it was unfortunately just a delinquent. There is one phrase that links them both, and that is ‘Jesus Christ!’

If there was a generic headline for last week’s avalanche of publicity for Top Gear’s Top Buffoon it would have said, “Breaking news: Idiot says something idiotic” with the sub-heading “idiot continues career in idiotic statements.” At least Penguin (publishers of Clarkson’s latest book) can look forward to a lucrative festive period after blanket coverage - a publicity masterstroke.

It would be very easy now to continue this post in a sanctimonious manner and ‘Clarkson bash’ but, alas, it has no doubt been done elsewhere. There is one point though that I would like to drag out of this and I’d imagine that many other PR folk would have been asking themselves the same question. Whilst the BBC reacted swiftly to avoid another Sachsgate last week, how should digital marketers and brand managers react to the Clarksons of the social web?

Far too often, unwanted opinions are shared across social media channels in a wholly un-social way, yet brands leave them up as a badge to prove how ‘social’ they are. Peter Wood points out here that whilst ‘the democratisation of the social web is indeed a wonderful thing, the shift in power from brand to customer has hugely impacted our rights as consumers,’ and I agree. In short, I have a right to go on a brand’s FB page and not see a post from another customer that could, if said in public, result in arrest. Behold the below.

So, whilst the BBC should apologise for Clarkson’s comments (as well as giving Piers Morgan the opportunity in the form of 140 characters to take the moral high-ground) perhaps the real lesson to learn is for us social media managers. If viewers of The One Show can expect an apology for Clarkson’s comments from the BBC and Clarkson himself, fans of brands’ social channels should expect an apology when comments are made by the Clarkson’s of the social web. Moderation is necessary, not just for the credibility of the brand but also for the experience of the user.

The Nivea For Men ‘Recivilize Yourself’ ad may sound a bit racist…

Marketing executives are all too aware of the treacherous minefield that is political correctness. Every now and again some poor creative is forced to lament their glaringly-obvious-with-hindsight-blunder as the brand they represent steps perilously into the realm of the ‘-isms.’ Earlier this year, Cadbury fell to the sword of racism and an angry reaction from Naomi Campbell; most recent example of taking the fatal wrong turn into this treacherous domain however is Nivea For Men.

Yes, across the pond the internet has erupted with fury in reaction to Nivea’s most recent campaign: Look Like you Give a Damn. The print ad in question features a clean-shaven black man (presumably post Nivea for Men grooming session) grasping a mask of his former Afro/bearded head (presumably pre-Nivea for Men grooming session). The connotations that come with the bold ‘Re-civilize yourself’ tagline emblazoned across the top are all too obvious. It might as well say put down the spliff, turn down the boombox and get a get a real job (i.e. not hustling, gang-banging or being a menace to south central whilst drinking your juice in the hood). Obviously this was not the intended message but you get the point.

Such a faux pas in the past would have been enough of a challenge for PROs, never mind when it has stirred up a social media storm with raging real-time debate. Rihanna, Nivea spokeswoman, has since ditched the brand.

The ensuing Facebook activity has even seen both extreme sides of the race debate and many posts have claimed that the reactions to the ad from black communities are oversensitive. Angry African American graduates have also posted pictures of themselves receiving their doctorates, natural afro hair in tow.  

Nivea’s response on their Facebook page is credit worthy – it would be all too easy to give up transparency at this point and hide from the issue. They posted the following;

“Thank you for caring enough to give us your feedback on the recent ‘Re-civilized’ NIVEA FOR MEN ad. This ad was inappropriate and offensive. It was never our intention to offend anyone, and for this we are deeply sorry. This ad will never be used again. Diversity and equal opportunity are crucial values of our company”

I can’t help but feel though, that this wasn’t enough. Social media is an opportunity for brands to engage with those who are most important to them and this is what Nivea should have done. With an active approach they could have replied to posts individually, come out of the blocks fighting, managed the online debate and restored some integrity over the whole matter.  

It all just goes to show that as the social web provides more and more touch points between brands and consumers, public relations becomes ever more essential for online activity.