Brands, Social Media and Transparency – Do they go hand in hand?

While browsing through blogs and articles on the financial effectiveness of using social media by companies, I came across a rather more fundamental debate on whether brands should actually be present on social media platforms like Twitter. In this blogpost, I would like to present few arguments made by some regular bloggers in this sphere, and round it off with my take on the issue. To limit the scope of the debate, I would restrict it to use of Twitter by brands.

In a blog post about an year ago on Mashable, a regular blogger Dr. Mark Drapeau opined that brands should not be allowed on Twitter. The reasons he puts forward are manifold. Twitter is about people engaging with people, and therefore brand names and logos for an account go against the spirit of the platform. Further, it reduces the authenticity and transparency if one is not aware of the identity of the person behind the account. Quoting the blogger – “So, does anyone really want to talk to @DunkinDonuts? Or would they rather talk to Bill Rosenberg, the founder of Dunkin Donuts of Canton, MA, or perhaps the local franchise owner on Capitol Hill, or a disgruntled but funny summer employee punching in at 4am? People connect with people, and so I think the latter.” Dr. Mark further states that even allowing brands to use Twitter for a fee will lead to a clutter of information and feeds, making it inconvenient for the users. He suggests that a better model will be to use personalities (transparent and authentic personal accounts) to influence organizational brands.

This blog sparked quite a bit of debate and many bloggers argued against the opinion. In his blog on online media, Mathew argues that the personal aspect of Twitter doesn’t put Brands and companies out of its purview. Accepting that just throwing in an account such as @DunkinDonuts is indeed a little dumb, but according to him, accounts like @Colonel Tribune, where a real person working for the organization talks about it, can be quite useful. This way one retains both the personal touch and trust, as well as brand connection. In another blog called Twittermaven, the blogger reports that a survey of 240 twitter users threw up that a majority (90%) would love to have brands engaging with customers on Twitter. However, it is important that companies do it right, in a manner as personable and transparent as possible, and not just use it as RSS feeds. Also, given that Twitter is an opt-in community, one can choose to follow whatever brand one likes.

In my opinion, there are certain brands which are more suited to do this than others. Brands spend a lot of time and energy is developing a character, and Twitter is indeed a good platform where those brand characters and customers can engage in a two way communication, unlike before. I mean, I will be interested in engaging with the character of ‘Utterly Butterly Amul girl’ for reasons such as fun, having grown up seeing all those interesting ads. In fact, it is somewhat like playing a video game of Harry Potter, a way to extend the character beyond the realms of traditional one way media. For the matter of transparency, I don’t think that knowing that the account for KFC is maintained by a marketing guy in some office makes any difference to the customer. However, knowing whether the account is official (as in maintained by the company, or by some agency for the company) or just some fan using the brand name, is essential. Improper usage of the platform and the brand name can go on to hurt customer relationships in the long run.

Nishant