The International Olympic Committee has released it’s Social Media Guidelines for participants and other accredited persons at the London 2012 Olympic Games.
The four-page document is the IOC’s attempt to recapture the ground it never had when Twitter became the must-have channel for those competing at the winter Vancouver 2010 games.
Remember the death of Georgian Luger Nodar Kumaritashvili and how the footage of the tragic accident ended up on YouTube, Twitter and other social networking sites. Happening just before the opening ceremony and the online chatter accentuated the lack of control and understanding that the Olympic committee had over social media and which cast a shadow over the Vancouver Olympics.
In the guidelines the IOC ‘actively encourages and supports athletes and other accredited persons at the Olympic Games to … post, blog and tweet their experiences.’ it directs those competing to avoid using social networking sites ‘for commercial and/or advertising purposes.’ If athletes and other accredited persons do break these guidelines then they risk accreditation being withdrawn. More worrying for athletes is the threat of possible expulsion from the games.
So how will these guidelines affect the work of public relations agencies working with athletes and their sponsors? Will non-accredited sponsors see these guidelines as a red rag to a bull? How strong will ambush marketing play during the 2012 Olympics? Remember how Dutch beer company Bavaria got, as The Daily Telegraph describes, ‘36 women wearing skimpy orange dresses attend the Holland versus Denmark game‘ to promote Dutch Bavaria beer in breach of Fifa guidelines. Organisers of the stunt were then arrested.
What are your thoughts? How important will social networking play for brands that are sitting outside the tent and that will never be able to be a participant in the Olympic experience?
IOC Social Media Blogging and Internet Guidelines-London
ASA #fail to understand social media
Friday, September 3rd, 2010The Adverting Standards Authority (ASA) siloed approach to regulating social media highlights this regulatory body’s lack of understanding of real-time communication channels.
On 1st September the ASA announced that the Committee of Advertising Practice (CAP) had empowered it to police ‘marketing communications online, including the rules relating to misleading advertising, social responsibility and the protection of children.’ The statement from the ASA added that, ‘the remit will apply to all sectors and all businesses and organisations regardless of size.’
It all sounded very well, apart from one specific paragraph, which stated, that journalistic and editorial content and material related to causes and ideas – except those that are direct solicitations of donations for fund-raising – were to be excluded from the remit.
And here lie the problem. The guidelines and regulations that the ASA wishes to apply to social media and networking channels appear to have been written from a 20th centaury perspective, where marketing disciplines where siloed – advertising was the big beast, direct marketing was direct marketing and public relations was, well, media relations. There appears to have been little understanding of the fact that social media and networking crosses all these marketing disciplines. In fact, it brings them together and maximises message penetration.
You would have therefore thought that the ASA would have consulted widely before announcing that it was to regulate social media channels. Well, its statement said that the regulations that it would be enforcing were formed as a result of ‘formal recommendations from a wide cross-section of UK industry.’ Very odd thing to say given that the Chartered Institute of Public Relations and it’s Social Media Advisory Board, which I should declare that I sit on, had been omitted from any consultation even though numerous requests were made.
Without a doubt social media has to a certain extent be regulated – best practice needs to promoted. The CIPR is currently reviewing its social media guidelines and has uploaded these to a wiki where people can register and share their thoughts.
Online and social media has changed the way that companies, brands and consumers interact with each other. Transparency has a higher value than ever before, especially in a world where the old ‘broadcast communications model’ is taking a back seat to a ‘conversational’ one where consumers and stakeholders can cross examine business.
The ASA is right, there is a need to regulate. But before doing so there needs to be a clear understanding of what one are trying to regulate, and why. Marketing communications is changing. Six months, the time until 1 March – when the regulations are currently due to come into force, is a long time in social media terms.
Engagement, dialogue and understanding comes through dialogue. So lets start here.
Tags: #ciprsm, advertising, asa, cipr, communications, guidelines, marketing, pr, public relations, regulation, social media, social networking
Posted in advertising, comment, pr, social media | 1 Comment »