Ready? Set? Fail!

March 27th
Gabriel Chua


“Congratulations! You’ve just failed!”, is a sentence no business in existence would like to ever hear. But here’s the thing. There are still Social Media companies that, surprisingly, still do not exercise due diligence and care when it comes to businesses seeking to utilise their platforms for online marketing campaigns, and have it proven ultimately unsuccessful from these Social Media companies not dealing with trolls, bots and other Social Media aspects that seek to do harm. Instead, these Social Media companies choose to reinforce their their own spam policies without getting down to the heart of the matter. And that could have some real serious repercussions not just for them, but for the businesses that they attempt to aid as well.

So why exactly do these Social Media companies do what they do? I am of the opinion that they are overconfident in their systems and setups that they do not bother to be proactive in the way they manage their content.

Walkers Crisps #WalkersWave Selfie Stunt Backfires In Spectacular

Does the picture above surprise you? I kid you not, that this was a picture that actually appeared on particular company’s Social Media campaign when they utilised Twitter..Walkers Crisps, a UK based snack company, had the brilliant idea of offering UEFA Champions League tickets as a competition prize in which they asked Twitter users to send in selfies of themselves to promote the brand after which footballing icon, Gary Lineker, would show the submitted selfies on an animated video. All good right? And what possibly could go wrong? Well, the picture above was an example of what could go wrong. Instead of submitting selfies, trouble-makers submitted photos of murderers and images of other ethically questionable characters. Twitter clearly didn’t bother setting up control measures in the event that Walker Crisps marketing campaign failed and instead allowed their spam policies to oversee the process trusting that it was foolproof. True, Walker Crisps could have better managed the whole fiasco themselves but Twitter, in my eyes, have to accept a majority of the blame since they are the ones responsible for allowing what users get to see. Such fallacy by Twitter caused not only Walker Crisps to suffer from negative publicity, but additionally once again showed the many potholes when it comes to using Social Media.

Image result for internet troll gif


In the event that trolls beat you to the punch, there are some serious consequences that you might have to suffer from as a result. Well, in the short run, it’s rather obvious that marketers would suffer from backlash and for consumers, they’d not be able to get the results they wanted when participate in certain campaigns. But what about in the long run? If tweeting and posting a Facebook update doesn’t seem to be working, then companies, by and large would stop utilising platforms which could them see them suffer from a drop in sales and revenue and consumers, on the other hand, would again boycott the products and services by the companies which the Social Media giants failed to protect. All quite scary, is it not? When you have to suffer from something that was not really even your fault to begin with.


Are Social Media companies ready? Will they set you on your way? Will you, user of Social Media, experience success or failure?What do you guys think? That’s the end for me today so do let me know your thoughts and opinions in the comment section below!



Signing off,
Gabriel


10 thoughts on “Ready? Set? Fail!

  1. It is surprising how some companies can fail spectacularly where other companies thrive using a somewhat identical methodology in their social media campaign. I recalled my professor once mentioned Coca-Cola had a viral challenge, encouraging Facebook users to take on the challenge and upload a video or photo on Facebook. The beverage giant would then use their posts for its advertising campaign.

    That aside, I agree that Twitter should shoulder majority of the blame for not restricting certain contents that should not be shown to users. もちろんcompanies themselves have most of the burden to restrict these contents in their marketing campaign. しかし, social medias also need to step in to regulate especially if these campaigns heavily involves the public. Otherwise, a few of these trolls or “bad eggs” may easily tarnish the reputation of the company and credibility of the platform.

    Like

    1. Thanks for the info about the Coke viral challenge! I’ll be sure to check that out!

      Yup. I completely agree! Businesses use your platform because they trust in your security protocols and tools. But you, as the platform, should be proactive in removing potentially sensitive content rather than just policing your current policies which may not even take into consideration these pieces of sensitive content in the first place! I won’t go so far as to call mismanagement issues such as this an ethical breach. But Social Media companies should take the blame here because they’ve failed to protect and uphold the trust that their users placed in them. Not just your own reputation, but your user’s reputation as well, are on the line. Social Media platforms should realise this and not turn a blind eye to content that could have far-reaching consequences!

      Like

  2. Agree to a great extent that social marketing companies ought to exercise their due diligence but when do we draw a line between blaming the social media company or the business itself. True enough that social media companies should carry out their work thoroughly, there may still be people who wants to sabotage the companies or brands and find a way to bypass the spam prevention measures put in place. Are we blaming the wrong parties for such outcome?

    Like

    1. Interesting insight you have there! I’d be hard-pressed in giving a verdict to where the actual blame lies on. There are so many ill-willed individuals out there that only want to create trouble. But to answer your question of when the line should be drawn, I honestly think it should be drawn depending on who has the ultimate control, and in this case, the Social Media companies. They have the final say in allowing what gets to be seen, True, usually, you cannot remove content instantaneously the moment it is deemed to be overtly negative, but it is almost a given that in this day and age that you should be proactive in whatever you do, especially when it comes to business! In the example case I used, Twitter should have been more swift in detecting the trolls so that it wouldn’t have impacted Walker Crisps that much! It sort of proves that colloquial saying, “Don’t hate the player, hate the game.” In this case, Walker Crisps being the player, and Twitter being the game!

      Like

  3. Agree with you, Gabriel! As per your mention, it’s really scary to know that companies do not exercise diligence and care while trying to utilise Social Media to their advantage. To many companies, some may feel that social media is simply about posting content. But what they failed to realize is that it doesn’t stop there as it requires an utmost amount of patience and on-site monitoring. It is really hard to determine who is at fault when other users tend to abuse the systems and sending inappropriate content.

    In my opinion, I feel that such situations require both parties to work hand in hand. As much as I feel that social media should be held responsible for not blocking sensitive content, there is always a limit on how much they can do. It is practically impossible to block every sensitive content out in the social media since some can be masked as an ordinary content.

    Nevertheless, great insights from this post! Hope to see more of such content in the future. Cheers~

    Like

    1. That’s right!

      It is interesting that you mentioned about how some harmful and negative posts can occasionally masquerade as seemingly ordinary posts. I really never thought about it that way which would actually make things more difficult than they already are for Social Media companies. Considering this, then perhaps Social Media companies should update their security protocols more regularly and work together with the businesses using their platform such that they themselves and their users will be less likely to fall victim to hacking and other ill-willed individuals.

      Like

  4. Insightful Read! It is definitely scary how you would think that your campaign could suddenly go south just like that example that you mentioned. Agree with your opinion that they may be overconfident with their spam policies and not getting to the root of the problem. The way I see things, where to fault businesses or the social media giants when things go wrong seems to be in the grey area.

    Like

    1. Hmmm, I guess I can see where you’re coming from about whom the actual blame is to be placed on being in the grey area. Nevertheless, it should be, in my opinion, the duty of the Social Media companies themselves to monitor content on their own platform considering considering that they are the judge, jury, and executioner with regards to users of their networking sites.

      Like

  5. It is true that some social media companies lack practicing due diligence and when the matter blows up, consumers lose their trust in such companies. Especially if they are users of that social media, because their personal details are stored there. However when used correctly and carefully, social media helps to market products effectively! Nonetheless, both marketer and social media companies should conduct QC checks occasionally, to prevent unwanted data being published to other consumers that may cause backlash to the brand. Both parties should monitor so they share equal responsibility and not completely put the blame on social media companies !

    Like

    1. Mmmm, Although I do feel that the majority of the blame in such incidences should fall upon the Social Media companies, I do see where you’re coming from about how the fault should not lie entirely on them. QC checks should perhaps come from both parties so that threats such as spam, bots, trolls and whatnot would be minimised. I perhaps should’ve weighed into this more myself so as to perhaps come up with a more thorough point of view. Thanks for the insight!

      Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s