As the New England Patriots Twitter snafu in late November demonstrated, it’s impossible to deal with customers on social media without also dealing with religion, politics and cultural differences.
A recap, just in case you missed this recent social marketing nightmare: the New England Patriots hatched a RT campaign to celebrate hitting one million followers on Twitter (News - Alert). As thanks, the team promised to reward anyone who retweeted their “we hit one-milion” message with an auto-generated response featuring the individual’s Twitter handle emblazoned across a virtual Patriots jersey, along with a handwritten “thanks, Patriot (News - Alert) nation!” signed by Patriot tight-end #87 Rob Gronkowski.
Most of you have already anticipated what happened next. Yes, some Internet troll with a racist, derogatory Twitter handle participated in the retweet campaign. And, yes. The Patriots—their auto-generating filters, that is—let it slip by and responded to the RT with the promised goods: the personalized, derogatory handle printed across the signature Patriots jersey, complete with the “personalized” thank you from Gronkowski.
It takes just one bad apple.
Cue the damage control. Many on Twitter complained about the Patriots’ response, a single tweet with the explanation, “Our filtering system failed & we will be more vigilant in the future.”
While it’s understandable that the Patriots don’t want to take ultimate responsibility for crafting a racist message, the racist Twitter handle was part of their branded images and tweeted by the team—and this is the calling card of the Patriots enterprise. Many in the Twittersphere called for a statement that showed greater accountability by the team, because filter system or no, the message of hate was posted publically under the Patriot banner. Others point to fundamental controls on speech that a billion-dollar, publicly traded company like Twitter should have on its users.
What are the lessons learned from the Patriots’ Twitter debacle? They can be largely summed up in three principles to keep in mind when branding online.
- Research and plan campaigns around the speech controls at work (or not at work) in each of the online platforms where branding occurs:
No longer is there such thing as a one-size-fits-all “social marketing strategy” that works for all platforms. Unlike Facebook (News - Alert), which clearly prohibits hate speech in its Community Standards, Twitter does not have such controls yet. In fact, the two platforms differ greatly in the area of free speech: Facebook bans speech and groups with known links to violence that are otherwise protected by the Constitution. Google (News 
- Alert) doesn’t post ads on sites that “promote hate or racism”. Twitter, at least so far, has taken the hands-off approach, calling themselves the “free speech wing of the free speech party.”
Do your homework. Cater your campaign to the particular platform, so that your commitment to consumer communication doesn’t outweigh the very principles of your brand’s image.
- Don’t automate everything:
Pretty simple and pretty difficult to do, because social media enables brands to launch low cost, high volume marketing efforts. But, at the risk of sounding clichéd, there really is no such thing as a free lunch, and that also holds true in the case of social marketing. An enterprise brand like the New England Patriots, who are worth about $1.4B, can’t afford to put their message in the hands of any online user with an offensive handle.
Whether or not Twitter chooses to adopt language controls a la Facebook, social media backfires like this one reveal why PR experts advise against automation in any major campaign. Despite the temptation to amplify your message at the click of a button, (and, not to mention at no- or low cost) protecting the integrity of your organization’s guiding spirit and principles—chief amongst them avoiding hate speech—must be top priority. Brand integrity is tricky to protect in an arena where brand messaging can and should demonstrate versatility.
- Remember that your consumer’s online presence does not necessarily speak for your enterprise:
An inventive idea like the Patriots’ retweeting campaign can easily tip over into digital hijacking. Once you put your branded material online, you have little control over its movement—you can only do damage control if things go awry. Find specific ways to engage your online audience while maintaining a level of control over the core conceptual property your brand. So in order to launch a retweet campaign like the Patriots did, in which you retweet private handles or messages into branded images, you’ll need tighter controls to vet the content that individuals contribute. This means either putting a round of readers in place before publishing, or limiting what the public can contribute to your branded message to pre-selected sentiments or images. Keep in mind that engaging consumers with your brand does not mean that you align your brand with all of the unknown variables in your audience.
Branding has become more and more integrated into the vast and unpredictable sea of personalized technology. Social platforms enable brands to present their message with multi-faceted, interactive messaging capabilities; these capabilities are in turn available to consumers, who are free (especially on Twitter) to express a full range of political, religious and personal prerogatives. Social is here to stay, and its benefits often outweigh the costs to keep up with the ever-changing digital terrain.
Davy Kestens is the co-founder & CEO of Sparkcentral, a market-leading enterprise customer engagement platform designed from the ground-up to inspire and enable amazing customer experiences
Edited by Maurice Nagle
