This week, I was joined by co-host Sarah Wurrey, and we discussed the (possible) dangers of having brand-sponsored promoted Tweets linked to tasteless trending topics (hey, alliteration!), whether all bloggers should be considered promotional partners, and the NYPD’s foray into social media monitoring with a very specific objective.
Today’s program is 30 minutes long.
- We kick off the discussion by examining a post from AdAge Digital, which discusses some unfortunate instances where brands’ sponsored Tweets were tied to some hashtags in bad taste. This is bound to happen on the Twitter platform, but can–and should–anything be done about it? I review some examples of how brands have encountered this problem, and Sarah points out that this is the nature of Twitter–but, she suggests that maybe a filtering mechanism, such as already in place to discern between top trending worldwide/top trending by country might be a solution. If you can filter by those, why not by topic–top trending entertainment, top trending politics, and so on. I think this would be an interesting work around, ultimately more useful for marketers and advertisers as they could target the promoted Tweets better.
- Next, we pick up the Social Media Explorer piece “Bloggers are promotional partners, which is bad for PR.” While my views on this are already known, I was interested to hear Sarah’s thoughts on the piece. She notes that there are many reasons for examining bloggers closely prior to conducting outreach–and that it does matter where their financial support is coming from–so really there should be no blanket assessment that they all fall into the category of promotional partners.
- Finally, we talk about a pair of articles discussing the revelation that the NYPD is monitoring Facebook and Twitter for signs of criminal activity. Now, I’m not sure exactly why it isn’t obvious that law enforcement would be doing this–it makes sense and just doesn’t seem like a big news item to me. Sarah points out that it depends on how they are gaining access to the information. If they are just searching the public stream and profiles set to ‘public,’ then yes–people should assume someone is reading the content. But accessing data in accounts set to private, we both agree, is a violation of privacy. Sarah wonders where the courts will lead us on this, because inevitably this sort of evidence will be challenged.