CATEGORIES
- NYC COVERAGE
- WEB STARTUPS
- WEB NEWS
- CONFERENCES
- WEB TECH JOBS
- VENTURE CAPITAL
- MICROSOFT
- INTERVIEWS
- ADVERTISING
- VIDEO
- ALL TOPICS
- ALL COMPANIES
CONTRIBUTORS
Should We Assume All Social Media is Paid?
The topic of paid social media is something I’ve been thinking about a lot of the past few months. When I met with Scott Monty of Ford, I mentioned the idea of assuming that all social media is paid. Perhaps you already do assume that what you read is already paid or sponsored although I’ve tried to think that what I read is genuine unless otherwise noted. For the purposes of this discussion, I am leaving the “is paid social media good or evil” on the side for another day.
Scott noted that the 100 paid reviewers of the Ford Fiesta will disclose that they are part of the “movement”. That’s great that there will be disclosure – it’s something that many of the paid reviews systems have moved to. And while I am using Ford as an example, they are by no means alone with regards to my question. Whether it’s Izea, Magpie, in-house ad sales, etc, the question continues to grow in importance. And I haven’t even mentioned pimping by investors, friends, family members, etc.
Disclosure is easy on a blog, but what about as the blog entry is pushed around. Does the disclosure travel with the blog entry? And more importantly, what about all of the social media services like Twitter, Friendfeed, Facebook, Plurk, etc.? How do we define disclosure on these networks?
Scott says that twitter messages will be tagged with a #tag. But if I am a new/general user of Twitter, how do I know that #tag means that it’s a sponsored message? Magpie sticks #magpie into the Twitter message but the same question applies. What if I want to note my post about the Ford Fiesta on Twitter – if I use the #tag, does it then appear that it’s a sponsored post? What about users who find a Twitter message via a search? What about retweets (that is where another Twitter user shares a message from another user)?
Melanie Notkin was paid by Disney to push out Twitter messages about a new movie release. In her blog post she noted, “Every time I tweet a ’sponsored’ tweet from Disney, I will use #SADisney. That way, you’ll know it.” That works for people who have read her blog post, but what about all of the new followers she gets each day, users searching for Disney or people that don’t read her blog. How do they know that she isn’t just saying she likes the Disney movie and is instead getting paid to push messages to her followers?
Twitter’s not alone – what about photos on Flickr or videos on YouTube. Yesterday I watched a video that was paid for by Intel about Intel. The blog post noted that the video was paid but there was nothing in the actual video regarding the sponsored status. Had they put a note upfront about the paid status inside of the video, that would suffice for the video medium. So viewers on Youtube.com or in an embed have no idea the content was paid.
As more companies expand their efforts to buy users in return for authoritative media impressions and content, this issue of paid social media disclosure will only continue to rise. And companies will increase their spend in this area because it’s cheap and provides a greater return than a traditional banner ad or widget.
The bottom line is that just sticking a hashtag (e.g. #tag) on a twitter message, photo or video isn’t enough to properly disclose a relationship.
Could it be that some companies actually like this usage of paid social media because it looks very authentic and they can claim disclosure that most system users will never realize is actually sponsored or paid? I certainly hope not.
We need to come together to to develop standards around social media disclosure so that we never blur the lines between a person paid for their content and those who are doing it out of true passion or concern. On the other hand, we could just assume everything we read on any of the social media sites is paid.
very thought-provoking piece – agree that hashtags are not enough – maybe the social sevices can agree on a way to highlight paid tweets/flickrs/tubes?
It’s a real shame that so many are willing to do whatever a company wants for a bit of cash.
There are things website owners can do to help too.
For example, on our site, users have a hidden “inner circle” of trusted friends (separate from the general population, and your “normal” friends) and every system splits that data from the rest for you to analyze.
On one hand, it makes many things a lot harder. But on the other, we believe it’s a better long-term investment (to keep “real” users happier). A lot of site owners aren’t able (or willing) to make this investment.
Allen,
I’ve said this before (on this very site) and I’ll repeat it again: the Fiesta Agents are not being paid.
And in the instance of Twitter, where you only have 140 characters, tying everyone to a single unifying hashtag alllows anyone who’s following to track the hashtag and see what the larger program is about. You can’t honestly be expecting a full disclosure statement to be uttered in the short form of Twitter.
Scott Monty
Global Digital Communications
Ford Motor Company
@ScottMonty
Scott – we will debate forever as to whether they are paid or not :) Def. not in cash I agree.
Right about the disclosure – that’s what I am talking about here. when a post on a social service is paid or sponsored, how can we be sure that it is such? A hashtag is just not good enough – and I get that a full disclosure statement is not possible. But there has to be some good compromise.
As I noted in my post, companies will use this to their benefit which worries me even more.
I think your disagreement points out the futility of the argument. People have completely different ideas on what is a good reason for advocacy, what is a conflict, and what is a payment.
People can come up with as many systems as they like, but it is a truly foolish reader that accepts writing as unbiased or true without any real reason. Any voluntary system would work great for people that are voluntarily honest– the very people that aren’t a problem now. And any compulsory system would be unacceptable, and an abdication of our own critical thinking abilities.
I think I am going to to stick with trusting people for my own reasons and let others do the same. In general, disclosure or not, it’s not tough to identify a shill or someone whose opinion you don’t value.
i totally think it’s fine for social media to be paid for….however – get your grubby hands off ‘#’
BS it means this is a paid for post.
People were using # tags way before you guys came along – go find something else to signify a paid for post as # belongs to another purpose.
May i suggest ‘$’ at the start and finish of each post?
Cheers,
Dean
#Cognation
i like that dean – $ for paid/sponsored post
Sponsered Post have rules and strings attached that the public does not realize, which isn’t fair. Like for example Scott Monty; I replied, and interacted with his twits, and he ran to General Counsel, threating to slap me with a court order to not contact (any ford employees) . So Social Media can be like real like TV . Or real like a passion a mother has when she looses her son to a big bad corporation that failed to recall a $20 part! All great business decisons, just not good for us, regular people, that blog with out the Big FORD FOR EXAMPLE :Scott Monty
Global Digital Communications
Ford Motor Company
@ScottMonty
YES, WE SEE YOUR NAME TWICE SCOTT MONTY!
Let’s keep this post general regarding paid and sponsored disclosure on social media services. If you’d like to comment about ford, do it in the ford post please.
I still think most conversations are genuine. but there are a ton of paid ones and most people don’t and will never realize the companies that are paying people. They will say its disclosed and that covers them.
Its tough but I dont think there will ever be a complete standard because to many people will not adapt/ know about that.
Scott, i dont care if you pay, dont pay, or ‘gift’ the fiesta bloggers (in fact i sort of know one of them at arms length.
However – I’d be super curious to know what you think of my $ tag idea?
sure 1 character out of 140 is a reasonable request.
think about it you could start a trend in responsible social media….thats worth PR on it’s own.
looking forward to your response.
Cheers,
Dean
Don’t forget the connection to new proposed FTC regulations regarding endorsements in advertising expanding to use by third-parties in social media contexts. Disclosure is likely first step required by FTC, and its a good point that this is harder on Twitter. Doubt that hashtags are enough because it is the perception of potential consumers that matters most, not simply the fact that one made a disclaimer or disclosure available for those who went looking to find out.
[...] Should We Assume All Social Media is Paid? (centernetworks.com) [...]
Do I have to put a “$” sign next to anything I write about a company if I won a Flip camera from them at a trade show? Can someone working in PR talk about a client on Twitter without noting in every post their relationship with that company?
Disclosure is a blurry business. For what it’s worth, I think it should be noted that Ford isn’t telling the agents to do or say anything.
Compare that to Magpie, where they essentially pay Twitter users to say their bidding, and it’s really not apples to apples. What it IS is a really good discussion.
Amy – I noted in the post that we can talk about examples like what you noted for a long time – however paid or sponsored is easy.
And I am sorry but I disagree with regards to your statement about Ford. We can certainly debate whether the campaign is “paid”, we already know there will be “missions” and they just completed a multiple-day training. While we can assume that they can say positive or negative stuff, they are required to talk… and talk… and talk… I will be watching and reporting each month on the missions.
This is a growing issue so I’m glad to see it being discussed. I certainly don’t have all the answers but like the discussion and awareness around the issue so we can develop best practices.
We need to figure out how to best handle disclosure in other social media vehicles beyond blogs, because you’re right Allen, once the vehicle leaves its origin, such as the example you gave, a video, the disclosure doesn’t go with it if it’s not attached to the vehicle/medium and resides back on the original post. Of course Twitter is a bit different than videos and there’s some gray areas, but I kind of like Dean Collins’ idea of using a “$” sign. Hey, Dean you might be onto something.
Thanks Allen, good post and discussion!
my two cents (or two dollars) for what they’re worth…
http://oddlittlebean.com/blog/twodollars/
thanks bliss – of course your views are worth a lot – way more than two cents :) – I read your post and will reply over there…