Social Truth – Ethics, Law and You

Social Truth - Ethics, Law and You

by Matt Ridings on Jun 08, 2010 Follow @techguerilla

Tweet
Buffer

Being involved in the social media consulting circles I tend to see more than my fair share of what these people post and tweet. One disturbing trend that I have been seeing lately is a complete lack of disclosure taking place.

While this used to be a very gray area when it came to blogging, twitter, etc. the more recent FTC guidelines have attempted to clarify this. And while it might be an interesting exercise to dig into that 80+ page document and try and explain line by line what it means, it would also be boring as hell. Much of the focus to date has been on the disclosure of gifts, monies, etc. in exchange for favorable blogging/reviews.

Isn’t This Just About Blogs?

In the consulting world it is more often the case that our conflicts of interest revolve around who our clients are.

Suffice it to say that through the FTC document, on the record comments they’ve made, and various Truth In Advertising guidelines they have made it clear that you have to disclose conflicts of interest and/or things of material value that would have an influence on the information you are publishing.

This applies just as much to Twitter and Facebook posts as to blog posts. Yes, you must fit your disclosure into your 140 character tweets.

Ethics Schmethics

So that’s the “legal” side of things (note that what the FTC publishes are actually “guidelines”, which are then actionable via lawsuits/fines, it’s semantics in the end but just wanted to be clear).

And while that may be the more serious side, I’d like to focus my attention here predominantly on the ethics side. Namely because I want to hear your feedback on various scenarios of what is and is not ethical. The real value of this post will be in these comments, not my opinions. To that end, here are your scenarios, remember I’m looking for your response on ethics and not law, we already know that some of the scenarios mentioned are technically illegal:

1. Is it ok to promote your client through tweets, Facebook posts, Yelp/YouTube reviews, etc. without disclosing that they are your client?

2. Is it ok to have your friends & family promote your client without disclosure, and does it matter if they are not receiving any direct compensation for doing so? Obviously they have a interest in your success.

3. Is it ok to present “false dialogs” as a means of putting your client in the spotlight? (false dialogs are when you actually control the clients Facebook or Twitter account and make it appear as if ‘they’ are having a conversation with ‘you’ when in reality you are on both ends of the conversation. In some cases this may be a broad base of accounts, perhaps you have established hundreds of generic twitter accounts for example which have these ‘dialogs’ in public)

4. Do any limitations exist regarding staff in your organization? (is it ok for the receptionist to tweet positively about a hair stylist who also happens to be your client…i.e. even though there is no intentional deception, is it important to insure you maintain the appearance of avoiding conflicts of interest?)

5. What can you do where a client relationship is confidential? The vast bulk of my clients are confidential, does that mean that I have to avoid saying anything positive about them since I can’t disclose that they are a client?

6. Let’s make things a little harder. What if the Huffington Post were Chris Brogan’s client (they are not to my knowledge), if he re-tweets a positive statement *someone else* said positively about them is that kosher?

I think many of these answers will come down to ‘intent’ where ethics are concerned, but I’m interested to hear your viewpoints. And one last question, do you think the rash of non-disclosures I’m seeing is happening simply due to ignorance or is it a blatant disregard of law and ethics?

I look forward to hearing what comments, questions, and new scenarios you come up with.

Cheers,

Matt Ridings - @techguerilla

Post Author

Matt Ridings

As CEO for MSR Consulting, Matt has the privilege to consult for a variety of progressive organizations ranging from name brand enterprises to nascent startups while leveraging his background as a creative problem solver and strategic thinker. Matt... View Full Profile →

http://sbolen.me/ Stephen Bolen

Good points, Matt.

I'm seeing a lot of Yelp/Foursquare stuff with restaurant clients in the St. Louis area from one particular agency. For instance, I checked into Busch Stadium for a baseball game recently and had the “Nearby” popup window tell me to head to a restaurant and mention Foursquare for a drink special. I know for a fact that this restaurant is a client of the agency, and it wasn't the actual agency account that was promoting the special – it was the principal's personal account.

While it may be “ethical,” I think it falls into a grey area. On one hand, you want/need to drive as much business as possible to your clients. On the other hand, to obfuscate your intentions can be a bit sketchy.
http://www.techguerilla.com/ Matt Ridings – Techguerilla

I've never seen the “nearby” feature on Foursquare so to be honest I don't really follow what you're referring to there? I got lost somewhere in the client-agency-principal circle. Regardless, my preference would be to deal with hypothetical scenarios here and not specific people/agencies. I realize you didn't name anyone, but St. Louis is a pretty small town and I'd likely have my own conflict of interests come into play in being able to comment if we delve too far into specifics since I either do business with or personally know virtually everyone in town.

I do think the last sentence in your comment is for me the most important. But I suppose to anyone who follows my writing it should be no surprise that “intent” is where I tend to focus my attentions.

Thanks for the comment.
http://sbolen.me/ Stephen Bolen

Hi Matt,

I can deal all day long in hypotheticals. :)

Let's say that your client is AT&T — specifically AT&T Wireless' retail division. Would it be ethical to add “Nearby tips” or “Things to Do” when someone uses Foursquare to check in at/around/near a Sprint or Verizon Store promoting AT&T's Wireless offerings/phone deals? Would it be ethical to trash a Sprint/Verizon Smartphone on a personal account without disclosure?

It certainly makes you think.
http://www.techguerilla.com/ Matt Ridings – Techguerilla

My hope is that the post does just that, makes you think. My personal opinion is that you should over-disclose, regardless of ethics, simply because you leave yourself exposed to claims of impropriety if you don't. I saw a Facebook thread recently from a person pushing a new product. It seemed unbiased and personal to me, but it prompted me to check out that persons east coast consulting company…and in their new case study list there sat the manufacturer of said product. Obviously I now take everything that person says with a grain of salt, even though they may have truly believed what they originally said. You can't afford for that to happen in the consulting world.
http://www.accuconference.com Maranda Gibson

I think you're right — ethics does, in the end, come down to intent. How many times have we said that we mean no harm, or we don't want to ruffle any feathers, but what is our true motivation behind that? If we're prefacing a statement with that so we can simply say whatever we want, that's not very ethical is it?
http://www.techguerilla.com/ Matt Ridings – Techguerilla

“Unethical practices” implies purposeful intentions, so in that respect I would agree. Where I might qualify that is in the fact that ignorance does not excuse an action that is unethical. Some people might not see something as being unethical when in fact it clearly is for example. The more difficult questions in my scenarios would likely be mitigated by the desire not to *appear* unethical. Many of my clients for example have products or services that I would likely tout in public even if they weren't my client. So is it unethical if I choose to do so? At an individual level I'd almost have to say it's not, my intentions were pure. However, the backlash and loss of trust that would occur if people *perceived* me to be unethical would simply not be worth it.
Jenn Cloud

Interesting indeed!

What is your proposition for how over-disclosure should be made? And also, what if a representing body chooses to work with a client that they just genuinely LIKE, how could one then separate the blur of work/preference?
http://www.techguerilla.com/ Matt Ridings – Techguerilla

As for disclosure, that would likely depend on the forum. In twitter for example, where space is limited, most people just tag their tweets with {client} if the tweet happens to be in regards to a person or business which is a client.

In regards to personal work/preference see my reply below to Maranda's comment.

Thanks for the feedback.
http://www.repumetrix.com/blog Joseph Fiore

Matt,

I followed your post from a tweet. That's quite a list of questions – difficult to see it as clearly as you've articulated it if/when we find ourselves doing any of it. Number 5's point on confidentiality is well noted and resonates most with me because I often practice restraint in even directing people to news items which make mention of clients, but at end, I don't think there is anything deceptive about sharing information on a hot button topic or an issue which intersects with both your business and personal life. Due to the nature of our work, I'm more inclined to be concerned about sharing information online if there is a possibility that it can be construed negatively. You might view this as being just as wrong as trying to spark an online pow-wow around positive buzz, but I really would rather not partake in causing undue reputation harm for anyone, much less a client.

My hunch is that numbers 2 and 4 make up the brunt of social media “high-giving'” that goes on. As much as I'm taken aback when I witness it (and only when I not only can see right through it, but know the relational tie) this “country club” mentality is found not only online, but thrives and charms just as abundantly in real life. Like my response above, it all comes down to whether something can even perceivably lead to lost trust, and while this shouldn't be the only motivation to turning away from unethical activity, a reputation hanging in the balance should remain a clear and present thought.

Joseph | RepuMetrix Inc.
@RepuTrack
http://www.repumetrix.com/blog Joseph Fiore

As interesting as it may have sounded, I meant “high-fiving” and not “high-giving” :)
http://michaeldaehn.com/ michaeldaehn

Sounds like a transparency issue. If you try to be transparent about your activities you will likely not do things you would perceive as unethical.

Honesty is the best policy :)
autom

that is an interesting slip, Joseph..as per usual, we share similar views with respect to handling disclosure in social media..also, scenarios will likely vary between B2B and B2C marketing frameworks— the latter likely resorting to and implementing strategies reviewed and sanctioned by inside legal counsel, as it pertains to mitigating potential risks and exposure to litigation – thanks for @-ing on this post – autom
autom

oops meant to say “the former” resorting to..etc..
http://www.techguerilla.com/ Matt Ridings – Techguerilla

I'm not a big believer in the word “transparency” (shocker, I know) but in your context yes.

Thanks for the comment
Chad

1. Are you getting paid?
2. If they're not getting paid, I would hope they are doing it because they believe in the client's offering enough to waste unpaid time talking about it. Otherwise, they need to get a hobby.
3. Nope. It's patently fake and damages the long-term brand for the sake of short term buzz. Once outed, the client is likely to feel some kind of fallout, even if it's just negative sentiment.
4. Not sure anyone who has a hairdresser as a client that the receptionist tweets about should be worried about intent or conflict of interest. But to your point, if the hairdresser/receptionist relationship is AUTHENTIC, then one can assume the intent is pure and therefore no conflict of interest. Your point about over compensating effort of full disclosure seems like a lot of “work” for the sake of appearance.
5. Nothing. And if the client wants confidentiality, then in my humble opinion they're not worth a tweet, positive or negative. They want that confidentiality for a selfish reason and generally speaking nobody likes selfish people.
6. That seems maybe a bit self serving and egotistical, but hardly unethical.

In the end, keep it real and in the immortal words of Bill and Ted, “being excellent to one another.” Bottom line: you can't please all the people all the time. Even with perfect ethics and great intentions you're sill gonna miss. Key is to be true and stick to your guns. Consistency is the key.
http://www.techguerilla.com/ Matt Ridings – Techguerilla

1. If they are a client then yes, by definition you are getting paid
2. The scenario was setup to imply you are asking others to do it for your benefit, not because they like the client. If the only reason your friends/family would do something for you is because they are getting paid that seems a little sad.
4. I'm not sure the amount of work involved should have a place in ethics (or the appearance of them). That doesn't mean I think it's unethical by the way, as I mention in another comment, I think it's fine. The flip-side is that the outside world doesn't know whether your relationship is authentic or not, thus the possible appearance/trust problem.
5. Yeah, I hate those selfish people. People who want contracts for example. So selfish. :P
6. Not sure how it would be self serving or egotistical to tweet about their client? Maybe you thought I meant the tweet was about themselves?

Thanks for the comments.
Chad Bookidis

1. If you're getting paid, then it's okay. In advertising, I get paid as an agency to “talk” about my client regardless of the channel.
2. If I ask my friends and family to pimp a client's business without them being somehow bought in seems yucky… really yucky. If they're paid, then it's okay for them to pimp it. See #1 above.
4. If the comment tweet sounds inauthentic, it probably is. I think people can sniff that out.
5. YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN. Self interest is ugly. Uboon2. That's all I'm saying.
6. I think I read your pronoun differently that you meant it.
http://www.techguerilla.com/ Matt Ridings – Techguerilla

1. So misleading an audience to think that you are expressing an unbiased expert opinion, when in fact you are a paid shill, is cool? Not in my book, but that's kind of the point of this post, to gather differing perspectives.

BTW, put your whole name in the title next time so I know that I'm speaking with my friend up the street next time :)

Social Fresh