Australian PR Directors and Managers looking at the Nestlé Facebook controversy that is reverberating around the marketing world should be looking behind the conversations that are taking place about the power of the consumer and what Nestlé is judged or perceived to have done wrong in the way it handled consumers.
The real questions for those responsible for public relations and communication revolve around the principles that govern the use of social media within your organisation.
The fundamental question is whether companies really understand the ramifications of getting into social media.
In all the commentary that has flowed over recent days by far the best I have seen is ‘7 social media lessons from Nestlé’s Facebook missteps’ from Andy Beaupre on ragan.com.
But in an otherwise excellent overview piece Andy doesn’t touch on who should control social media.
To me it’s a fundamental issue that all organisations who embark on the social media journey need to get right.
It’s about the purpose and authority of public relations within an organisation and the role of PR versus marketing.
I posed this question last November when I wrote that social media should be under the control of PR.
Among other things I pontificated that “social media exposes any organisation to things going horribly wrong and resulting crises and reputational damage. That’s why PR has a strong case for control”.
What I didn’t comment about in that article, but which the Nestlé example shows, is that any social media gaffe has the real potential to break-out into mainstream traditional media. And who is expected to deal with it then? The PR Director or Manager of course!
Most Australian organisations of any size have strict policies, rules, protocols and processes around dealing with the media. For large organisations only executives who have undertaken media training are allowed anywhere near the media – and often even senior executives do this having their hand held by the professionals.
Yet with the advent of social media we increasingly find that the gung ho people in marketing, often working with a bunch of people from ad land or interactive agencies, are increasingly being allowed to set up direct communication channels with consumers. There’s little control over them, and in the main they have no knowledge, or experience, let alone training, about how to engage or converse with critics.
What’s also overlooked is that increasingly consumer and environmental advocates, who for a long time have had to try and get their message to the consumer through the media gatekeepers, now find it much more productive to use social media channels.
While an organisation may effectively block or barricade the front door (i.e. through traditional media) these people can now come in an unlocked back door (i.e. social media), knowing that it’s a soft target protected by a bunch of product and brand people who have no idea about issues. They can easily be brushed aside and/or used. It just another version of guerilla tactics!
If I was an Australian PR Director or Manager and part of my KPI’s were based on maintaining levels of corporate reputation I would want to ensure that I had control over all the touch points that impact on that reputation.
The Nestlé Facebook controversy should be a wake-up call to ensure that social media becomes a PR responsibility.
Read an article I have previously written in PR Influences which covers:
- How does the advent of Online change communication strategy and tactics?
- How do you cope with rumour, innuendo and falsehoods online?
- Why pr is the tool to use in online communities?
- Five tips for engaging with the online community
|
|
|
|
|
 |
{ 2 comments… read them below or add one }
Although you make some valid points, I don’t agree with the term ‘control’ when it comes to Social Media. Many are guilty of this.
Andy Beaupre is right. In its purest form, contributions to social media platforms by the general public are personal expressions of opinion. You do not control this. Brands are already attracting negative publicity when they try. Brands can not expect to dictate terms of how they are perceived in this communications medium. Anyone who suggests that this is possible, is evidently not the ‘expert’ they proclaim themselves to be.
Social Media forays by brands have mostly been undertaken by a combination of companies, whether they are PR, Advertising or Digitally based. There is much debate as to who should ‘control’ this. It’s just a thinly disguised fight over who should be allocated the funds now being diverted away from traditional advertising media. Social Media is a different beast to PR. To treat those online in the same manner as PR companies address the press, is an instant fail with online gatekeepers.
To achieve successful social media campaigns, brands need to find advisors who are immersed in social media. Choose Strategists who have been blogging not just about marketing but across personal interests for a number of years and who have a vested interest and a history, plus network of participation in varied online communities. These people are committed to the medium, offer unique insight and intrinsically understand the unwritten rules of online dialogue.
Citizen Journalism is to be expected. The public is now in a position to vote with their feet and hearts when choosing which brands to support. Nestle is just one of many brands to have been made an example of via global online lobbying. I would suggest that it is foolhardy for businesses to bury their heads in the sand any longer. Consumers in developed countries are increasingly demanding accountability from multinational companies. It is time for marketers to listen and shape branded communications accordingly.
I agree with most of your comments but note that I think you have taken my term ‘control’ too literally. I mean ‘control’ in terms of the function/responsibility of social media within the organisation – not control of social media communication itself. And yes, all communication should be via people who understand the medium and are well versed in it. However, the communication principles that PR people use in dealing with the media is a lot closer to social media principles than what advertising or digital people bring to the table!