Distribution Network
Content
With some social networking websites becoming more influential than traditional media, how can companies respond when their reputations are attacked online?
If there's one key feature of the second phase of the internet's development - popularly known as 'web 2.0' - then it's the social networking sites such as YouTube, Facebook and MySpace that allow people to showcase themselves and their views.
Until recently the corporate world has watched this phenomenon with one eye on its commercial applications but, in general, with a fair amount of detached interest. However, this relaxed stance has given way to alarm during the last year. 'Social media' sites are increasingly demonstrating a capacity to focus attention on companies' alleged wrongdoings and to act as a portal for campaigns highlighting corporate irresponsibility.
A number of businesses have recently found themselves on the receiving end, including Kettle Foods, Nestlé and HSBC (EP9, issue 6, p8). YouTube recently created an online area for pressure groups that is already being used to post videos and campaign items on corporate behaviour.
Todd Parsons, co-founder and chief product officer of BuzzLogic, a US-based consultancy that advises companies on how to protect their brand reputations online, defines social media as 'web content such as blog posts, podcasts, and online videos created by individuals with the intent of sharing something valuable with others'. He argues that social media 'have now become so pervasive that some blogs are very close to garnering audiences that are as big as major newspapers' - and warns that corporations ignore the influence of such sites at their peril.
With the market research company Datamonitor estimating that 70 per cent of online content will be user-generated within three years, Business for Social Responsibility recently warned that 'an ever more viral internet is steadily eroding companies' control over their brands and reputations'. However, BSR also believes that social media provide 'fascinating opportunities ... that can advance the sustainability agenda and dialogue with stakeholders'. Others in the field take an equally positive attitude.
Fleishman-Hillard recently asked 2500 members of the American public whether they would go online to find out and share information, if they were concerned about what a company is doing. Just over half (51 per cent) of those who had such concerns said that they would, according to Tony Calandro, head of the communications consultancy's CSR specialty group.
'Companies are worried from a business perspective because that means you can no longer protect your message,' Calandro says. But he argues that if approached in the right frame of mind, the new social media networks can also be a great opportunity for companies to get their messages across. 'Every company needs to get into this now,' he says. 'These days the wisdom of the crowd is more credible to many people than mainstream media, so you have to move into that arena.'
Calandro says that businesses should monitor social media sites in the same way as print media, TV and radio. He says a 'handful' of his clients have got to this point and are now trying to understand how they can make their voice heard online.
'The key is to recognize that there are going to be comments about your company that you may not like - but that you have to let the crowd talk,' he says. 'Then you need to post stuff on YouTube and other sites that puts across your point of view. So you use the same space to respond.'
Starbucks recently did this when social media sites picked up on its spat with the Ethiopian government over trade marking of certain coffees, and the company made its own, well received, online reply to an Oxfam video posted on YouTube.
Daniel McGroarty, principal of Carmot Strategic, which advises Fortune 500 companies on communications, says businesses shouldn't fall into the trap of viewing social media as enemy territory. 'It's important to remember that things like YouTube are, in themselves, neutral,' he says. 'You can't allow yourself to be dazzled by the newness of it - it makes no more sense to fear this as a medium than to fear the camera or the newspaper, which were both just as new at one time.'
McGroarty argues that once companies take this more relaxed attitude, they will begin to realize that 'the old rules of dealing with the media still apply'.
Maryrose Dunton, product manager at YouTube, claims that her site is as keen to see businesses post their own views as it is to see those of individuals and civil society. But while she believes companies have little to fear from social media if they respond in the right manner, she stresses that this requires an understanding of who actually uses such sites.
'People tend to think our users are younger than they really are', she says. 'But we have a very wide demographic and if anything it skews towards 30-40 year olds. It's not just a young people's thing, and companies need to bear that in mind.'
If there's one key feature of the second phase of the internet's development - popularly known as 'web 2.0' - then it's the social networking sites such as YouTube, Facebook and MySpace that allow people to showcase themselves and their views.
Until recently the corporate world has watched this phenomenon with one eye on its commercial applications but, in general, with a fair amount of detached interest. However, this relaxed stance has given way to alarm during the last year. 'Social media' sites are increasingly demonstrating a capacity to focus attention on companies' alleged wrongdoings and to act as a portal for campaigns highlighting corporate irresponsibility.
A number of businesses have recently found themselves on the receiving end, including Kettle Foods, Nestlé and HSBC (EP9, issue 6, p8). YouTube recently created an online area for pressure groups that is already being used to post videos and campaign items on corporate behaviour.
Todd Parsons, co-founder and chief product officer of BuzzLogic, a US-based consultancy that advises companies on how to protect their brand reputations online, defines social media as 'web content such as blog posts, podcasts, and online videos created by individuals with the intent of sharing something valuable with others'. He argues that social media 'have now become so pervasive that some blogs are very close to garnering audiences that are as big as major newspapers' - and warns that corporations ignore the influence of such sites at their peril.
With the market research company Datamonitor estimating that 70 per cent of online content will be user-generated within three years, Business for Social Responsibility recently warned that 'an ever more viral internet is steadily eroding companies' control over their brands and reputations'. However, BSR also believes that social media provide 'fascinating opportunities ... that can advance the sustainability agenda and dialogue with stakeholders'. Others in the field take an equally positive attitude.
Fleishman-Hillard recently asked 2500 members of the American public whether they would go online to find out and share information, if they were concerned about what a company is doing. Just over half (51 per cent) of those who had such concerns said that they would, according to Tony Calandro, head of the communications consultancy's CSR specialty group.
'Companies are worried from a business perspective because that means you can no longer protect your message,' Calandro says. But he argues that if approached in the right frame of mind, the new social media networks can also be a great opportunity for companies to get their messages across. 'Every company needs to get into this now,' he says. 'These days the wisdom of the crowd is more credible to many people than mainstream media, so you have to move into that arena.'
Calandro says that businesses should monitor social media sites in the same way as print media, TV and radio. He says a 'handful' of his clients have got to this point and are now trying to understand how they can make their voice heard online.
'The key is to recognize that there are going to be comments about your company that you may not like - but that you have to let the crowd talk,' he says. 'Then you need to post stuff on YouTube and other sites that puts across your point of view. So you use the same space to respond.'
Starbucks recently did this when social media sites picked up on its spat with the Ethiopian government over trade marking of certain coffees, and the company made its own, well received, online reply to an Oxfam video posted on YouTube.
Daniel McGroarty, principal of Carmot Strategic, which advises Fortune 500 companies on communications, says businesses shouldn't fall into the trap of viewing social media as enemy territory. 'It's important to remember that things like YouTube are, in themselves, neutral,' he says. 'You can't allow yourself to be dazzled by the newness of it - it makes no more sense to fear this as a medium than to fear the camera or the newspaper, which were both just as new at one time.'
McGroarty argues that once companies take this more relaxed attitude, they will begin to realize that 'the old rules of dealing with the media still apply'.
Maryrose Dunton, product manager at YouTube, claims that her site is as keen to see businesses post their own views as it is to see those of individuals and civil society. But while she believes companies have little to fear from social media if they respond in the right manner, she stresses that this requires an understanding of who actually uses such sites.
'People tend to think our users are younger than they really are', she says. 'But we have a very wide demographic and if anything it skews towards 30-40 year olds. It's not just a young people's thing, and companies need to bear that in mind.'
Super Featured
No
Featured
No