Twitter - dangerous when in the hands of idiots

Twitter is dangerous in the hands of people who don't fully understand and appreciate what they're dealing with. This last few weeks have seen some great examples to illustrate the dangers of being blasé with microblogging.

WHEN THINGS GET SILLY
Perhaps the funniest example of Twitter being misused was the recent fail by the people looking after Susan Boyle's Twitter feed. To help promote her new album launch they issued a Tweet inviting feedback and questions. The hashtag they used was #susanalbumparty. Even on first glance it's clear to see the nudge-nudge comedic value of this hashtag - Su's anal bum party doesn't bear thinking about.

Many amateur (ie. non-marketing) commentators have guessed, wrongly, that this was in fact a brilliant piece of viral marketing. It might have been for anyone other than SuBo, but these people need to understand a bit about marketing.

Firstly, not all publicity is good publicity. Ask Lord McApline, who was incorrectly outed on Twitter and other media outlets as a paedophile. Getting your name / brand in the media is not always a good thing. From Gerald Ratner to Mitt Romney, history is littered with people who will argue quite strongly against the myth that 'all publicity is good publicity'.

Secondly, even if we assume for a moment that the #susanalbumparty hashtag was a genuine stunt, who exactly was it aimed at, and what was it hoping to achieve?

SuBo's audience is almost certainly older, conservative (small C), middle-Englanders and highly unlikely to either get the joke or appreciate it. It can't have been aimed at them. Her fans aren't going to start shrieking with glee that the angelic Susan Boyle likes to make jokes about anal bum parties. So perhaps it was aimed at everyone else, ie. the non-SuBo audience. If so, what were they hoping would happen? Did they suddenly think that we would all miraculously be converted into SuBo fans because of a rude Tweet and rush out en masse to buy the new album? The idea is nonsense.

Regardless of how entertaining marketing is, you can't sell meat to a vegetarian, you can't get BNP members to start listening to reggae, and a cheeky tweet isn't going to turn AC/DC fans into SuBo fans. It would be a complete waste of time, money and effort to even try. SuBo's management and record company will know this and will understand that SuBo has a natural audience and that's where their marketing efforts will be concentrated.

So no, the hashtag was not a 'brilliant piece of viral marketing'. It was an error. SuBo's management will be expert marketeers, so we can only assume the Tweet was issued in haste, probably by a junior, and not considered carefully or monitored by more experienced members of the team.

LESSON: Always treat social media messages with the same care you would any other marketing messages.

WHEN THINGS GET UGLY
A second, less humorous example of what can go wrong when Twitter is left in the hands of people who don't fully 'get it' concerns a rather ugly episode when a 'celebrity' chef took exception to a negative review of his restaurant.

Michelin-starred chef Claude Bosi took to Twitter to rain four letter abuse at an amateur critic who posted a less-than-glowing review on Trip Advisor. Using the most offensive of all swear words (the one beginning with C) Bosi clearly overreacted to what was a minor issue, but his overreaction has certainly turned a mole hill into a mountain.

The episode quickly snowballed with a few other chefs foolishly joining in to gang up on the reviewer, including apparently Tom Kerridge, Sat Bains and Tristan Welch, all equally as quick to shoot first and think later.

The problem all of these chefs - and their business - now have is that they've all showed a very ugly, very nasty side which sits in stark contrast to the way they their businesses are marketed. Their websites might portray relaxed, classy, friendly establishments, but the likelihood is that customers will now be aware that anything less than glowing praise, even if that praise is false, may result in a very aggressive reaction. I'm not one for restaurants personally, but if I was in the mood to eat out one night I would certainly give these guys a wide birth, they don't seem to be people I want to give my business to. The question is; how many other people will now feel the same as I do?

The problem here is that Bosi (and the other chefs) failed to appreciate where business ends and personal life begins (or is it the other way round?). It's a very common mistake when people, companies and brands get too personal on their Twitter accounts. It can be extremely unprofessional. Remember, it is highly likely that more people will read your Tweets than read your press releases. So why be slack with one and anal with the other? Treat them both the same. If you use a Twitter account in any way to promote your business, DON'T let your personal life pollute your Tweets.

LESSON: If you would never dream of saying it in a press release, don't say it via Twitter.

WHEN THINGS GET DOWNRIGHT DANGEROUS!
Finally, we reach the extreme limits of Twitter mismanagement.

Amongst the furore surrounding the Jimmy Savile revelations there's a lot of speculation and rumour-mongering. Most of it is the type of tittle tattle usually reserved for the pub. The difference is; that thoughts shared in a pub are lot less visible than thoughts shared on Twitter where they can be re-Tweeted, or appear in trends.

The real surprise here is that many people don't seem to realise that the law applies as much to Twitter as it does to the Daily Mail. Libel is libel. It doesn't cease to be so just because it's on Twitter. Considering how increasingly litigious we're becoming as a society, it's odd that people are so eager to post libellous comments on Twitter.

Lord McAlpine (mentioned above) has understandably not reacted well to accusations that he was in league with Jimmy Savile and his legal team are actively pursuing thousands of people who Tweeted his name in association with the claims. If those accounts have less than 500 followers they will be asked to make a donation to charity (as well as paying an admin charge), but they will have to reveal their names, addresses and jobs.

In amongst the largely anonymous trolls are some high-profile people who should know better, for example, the desperately clueless Sally Bercow. This is a woman who, as wife of the Speaker of the House of Commons, should have more of a grasp of things. But clearly her status as 'celebrity by association' has clouded her judgement. Not only is she towards the top of the list of people in the firing line of the McAlpine solicitors, but she even recently broke reporting restrictions about the case of the 30 year old teacher and the schoolgirl who ran off to France. You'd expect that kind of naivety from a 'normal Joe', but from the wife of a prominent politician?

Bercow has, wisely but belatedly, disabled her Twitter account. Without a doubt this is a sensible move because nobody with such a poor grasp should be allowed to have a Twitter account in the first place. The Twittersphere won't miss Bercow.

LESSON: I really don't know where to start...