Posts Tagged socialite
Somebody’s Watching Me
Posted by doates in New Internet, Public IM, Social Networking, Web 2.0 on April 29, 2012
The last couple of weeks have seen UK newspapers filled with stories over UK Government plans to expand its monitoring activities to include email and social media. The two extreme ends of the point of view being it’s either the only way to stop criminal activity or one step away from a draconian privacy invasion something a kin to 1984.
Neither extreme is accurate. Obviously the more seriously criminally minded will start to use other methods of communication that are more secure, if indeed they are not already. In a humorous look of the proposed legislation comedian and presenter of the BBC’s Friday Night comedy, Sandi Toksvig recently conjured up the image of two terrorists in balaclavas talking to each other on Skype saying “Yes, I promise you it really is me under here.” However, with the right controls, it can play a significant role in the fight against crime.
At the same time, most people don’t have time to read their own email, let alone anyone else’s. If Government was planning on checking content, which incidentally it says it is not, then it would have to be using keyword or lexicon search.
Type “bomb site:twitter.com” into Google and it is easy to see that just the profile names of tweeters alone would keep someone busy for a long time let alone the messages, so it’s clear that some intelligence would need to be applied to make searching content worthwhile. It also highlights the challenges of scale, something that defeated the Labour government in its attempt to introduce similar legislation in 2009.
Perhaps one of the key issues is that of trust. With stories of local councils using RIPA (Regulatory Investigatory Powers Act) to accuse citizens of flouting the school catchment rules, it’s no wonder many people are wary of giving any government power to see who they call or chat to over the internet. If the TV programme Spooks is to be believed, the security services already have the technology anyway and are using it to listen in to every mundane conversation, text stream and email conversation anyway so what’s the difference? This of course is a long way from reality. However, the monitoring of suspicious traffic is a logical and more importantly, justifiable part of the crime-fighters armoury and with the massive strides being made in keyword and lexicon search and identification technology, also relatively easy to implement.
It is not the ability to listen-in to me telling the world what I am having for dinner on Facebook that is the issue, but how much control is in place to ensure we know who can listen to what.
The bottom line is that the growth of social and electronic media use by the criminal fraternity is a serious threat to our national security and well-being. Last summer’s riots grew at the pace they did because of the use of technology such as Blackberry Messaging, SMS and Twitter and monitoring will allow for the police and security organisations to react quickly and effectively to protect our safety. Terrorist communications have been proven to often be in the form of cleverly coded electronic communications.
“Ah”, I hear you say, “but what about human rights?”. Well, I think we have a decision to make – either we take the view that logically, there will be far too much traffic to allow for any investigator to focus on anything other than posts, tweets and blogs that trigger alarm bells OR we do nothing and run the risk of the criminal element enjoying unparalleled freedom of communication. The real issue is one of checks and balances to ensure responsible application of regulations around monitoring.
For this reason the UK Government, and indeed the others that are bound to follow suit, must ensure that the legislation protects society, whilst also protecting the rights of the individual.
When we look at most industry regulation today, that means implementing the technology to enforce a policy, archive it and provide a full audit trail to ensure that actions are accountable and that only authorised personnel have access. This technology is available today and its use needs to be factored into any policy discussion by government
Although we will have to wait until the full plan is revealed to truly analyse the consequences, I think it is inevitable that this type of legislation will eventually come into force. We live in a world where real-time communications is the norm, it is unrealistic to expect those we look to protect us to do so without the tools to combat others that use them for nefarious activities.
Belbey Blogs: Blow Your Own Horn
Posted by belbey in Social Networking on March 1, 2012
The other day, on my daily walk at 7am, I saw a beautiful new cruise ship heading up the Hudson. She was surrounded by low flying helicopters, NYPD Fire boats spraying water a hundred feet in the air, and a flotilla of small boats. Magnificent.
I was unable to read the name on the bow and kept wondering, whose ship is this? As she passed lower Manhattan, she blew her horn. Nothing unusual in that. You see, many Captains sound their horns as they pass where the Towers fell, to honor the dead. However, instead of a long mournful blast, this was the first 5 notes of “New York, New York” (My- litt-le-town-blues). My fellow walkers stopped and clapped and smiled, and yet we still wondered, whose ship is this?
And then the Captain blew her horn again. The first seven notes of “When You Wish Upon A Star” rang out across Manhattan and New Jersey. Of course! Disney. And yes, when we looked more carefully, we could see Mouse Ears on the smoke stacks.
As it turns out, Disney’s newest cruise ship, the Fantasy, was making her maiden voyage from Germany, stopping in New York City to be christened, and then heading to her new home port of Port Canaveral.
So what does this have to do with social media? Everything.
We are beginning to shift the conversation from “No, we’ll be out of compliance” to “How do we do this well?”. We’ve learned social media is just another form of electronic communications and needs to be treated as such. We’ve also learned that once we have crafted our in-house social media policies and procedures, there are technology solutions such as Actiance Socialite, that we can trust to mitigate risk and keep us in compliance.
Now’s the hard part.
As marketers, how do we integrate social media into our corporate marketing strategy? After all, it’s just another tactic at our disposal. Over time, the tactics have evolved – public relations, direct mail, telemarketing, trade shows and events, email, websites — but, we’ve learned that to be successful, each marketing effort must reflect and reinforce the personality of the corporate brand and each point of contact must be part of a cohesive strategy. At the same time, we also must take the time to understand our audience so that we can version the message so that it resonates with our customers.
That’s exactly what Disney did. Through research, they uncovered the tradition of blowing the horn while passing the site of the World Trade Center. They then versioned the message to resonate with all New Yorkers by playing “New York, New York” and then reinforced their brand with a sound that is instantaneously recognized as Disney, “When You Wish Upon a Star.” Brilliant. And entertaining.
So using this example, Disney’s integrated marketing campaign generated press coverage by creating a special event, their website highlights the new ship (http://disneycruise.disney.go.com/), they tweeted about it (@DisneyCruise), and they are running sweepstakes and sharing video of the inaugural voyage of the Fantasy on their Facebook page (Disney Cruise).
How will you integrate social media into your marketing strategy?
Belbey Blogs: Observations from the road…
Posted by belbey in Compliance, Enterprise 2.0, FINRA, New Internet, Social Networking, Trends on November 1, 2011
As the Social Media and Compliance Specialist for Actiance, I am tasked with educating firms within regulated industries on how to use social media effectively, while meeting compliance requirements. In this role, I meet with clients, speak at industry events and am on hand to be the expert at seminars, trade shows and the like. This past few weeks, I’ve participated in lively conversations within the securities and insurance industries about deploying social media and thought I’d share what I’ve been hearing…
- When discussing book keeping requirements vs privacy issues at client meetings, several senior compliance professionals at large broker dealers have relayed that although FINRA is only interested in business communications, they plan to capture, supervise and archive all of their registered representatives’ use of social media. “How do I know that they aren’t doing business in their “personal” accounts is the question often asked? If they want to use the tools, the regulator is interested in the content of the message, not the identity that I used to post it”
- At the CEFLI Social Media – Regulatory Insights & Implementation Strategies Summit (http://www.cefli.org/events/summit-meetings/regulatory-insights-implementation-strategies) a senior marketing professional at one very large insurance firm told me that their advertising department develops content, sends it to their compliance department for approval and then adds the content to a centralized library for their producers to use. All subsequent conversations from that original content are supervised. At the same event, I learned that Facebook is the network of choice for many producers. They “friend” their clients and use “Life Events” such as getting married, buying a house and having children, as opportunities to sell insurance. I can understand that totally. Just like I understand why wealth management has great success with LinkedIn. Each market to their own network and all that.
- At the BDI Insurance Social Communications Leadership Form (http://www.cvent.com/events/insurance-social-communications-leadership-forum/event-summary-7391fdd325c149839aade4300775ba24.aspx a senior marketing professional from a global bank stated that not only is all content created by marketing and approved by legal, she personally crafts all the responses to the content for 10 Subject Matter Experts. I know for a fact, that since I, and members of the social team here at Actiance starting creating and crafting social messages, we’ve seen our organizations social interactions sky rocket. As is oft repeated in our internal meetings “ just because you give them access to social doesn’t mean that they know what they’re doing or what to share”.
- At the IQPC Financial Innovation Technology Forum (http://www.iqpc.com/Event.aspx?id=555242), one firm shared how they are using quizzes and gamification to drive revenue producing behavior. I love this and I love how gamification drives distributed teams – face it, if you’re in a team responsible for revenue you want to be the #winner so being able to see how you’re doing against your colleagues is conduicive to driving that behavior.
- And at the National Securities Compliance Professional (NSCP) Annual Conference http://nscpmeetings.com/2011/meeting-nat.html
Norv Leong, our director of product marketing, member of the California bar, legal ying to my social yang, and my booth mate for the conference were intrigued by the number of times we asked attendees whether they have social media policies in place and that they repeated “YES” Great we thought… until they added ”Our policy is no!”.
Want to know what we learned at the FINRA Advertising and Regulation Conference Stop by again shortly, and I’ll share all…
Hatches, Matches, & Dispatches: Marshalling Social Resources for Communications
Posted by nleong in Social Networking on November 1, 2011
None other than NATO itself used Twitter and Facebook to announce the killing of Muammar Gaddafi last week. Does that not strike (no pun intended) you as a bit odd for an organization typically associated with red tape and lack of consensus? That even NATO is using social media for notable events is a nod to the power of social media and its unique ability to marshal resources quickly and efficiently. The North African uprisings this past spring is a case in point.
Government agencies throughout the world are turning to social media to engage with their constituents and increase transparency. If anything, social media, due to its open nature, is tailor-made to exploit inconsistencies or misstatements. However, this cuts both ways. It can be a boon for events like the announcement of Gaddafi’s death or disseminating critical information during emergencies (e.g., natural disasters, terrorist attacks). But, if not used properly, social media can throttle an organization’s or individual’s reputation.
Some recent examples come to mind. Kenneth Cole, a US fashion designer, hijacked the #Cairo hashtag to promote his new spring collection of clothing. His insensitivity was quickly lambasted in social media sites, causing massive harm to his and his company’s reputation. Similarly, Airbnb, a startup that brings together folks with rooms to rent with those looking for a place to stay, tried to cover up a transaction gone awry. Instead of just admitting its fault and taking a proactive approach to rectify the situation, Airbnb came across as standoffish, paying a heavy price in PR damage.
Monitoring technologies, specifically geared towards social media, are available to government agencies and organizations. These sophisticated solutions enable the latter to effectively police the content posted to social media sites. In many respects, they are “trusted allies,” ensuring the safe use of social media in a very sensitive environment.
Because many of these international organizations are so large, the chances for a social media gaffe occurring are that much higher. For you statistics geeks out there, think of it this way: the larger the sample pool, the higher the probability of something going wrong. That’s why monitoring solutions can play an important role in managing social media activities.
Diffusing tense situations and providing stability in chaotic situations are central to NATO’s mission statement. Certainly, using social media wisely can be just as chaotic and challenging. Maybe that’s why NATO’s so comfortable using social. Do you agree?
If I “Watch” it, is it an endorsement?
Posted by belbey in Compliance, Financial Services, FINRA, New Internet, Social Networking on September 26, 2011
Facebook introduced “Gestures” this week, modifying it’s “Like” button to something more neutral such as “Watched”, “Listened” and “Read”. This was done based on recent research by Facebook that revealed that users, particularly teenagers, hesitate using the “Like” button as they view it as an endorsement.
However, teenagers aren’t the only ones concerned by the “Like” button.
As Financial Services firms begin to draft their social media policies, many have been considering blocking the use of the “Like” button on Facebook and LinkedIn, or Retweeting on Twitter, for exactly the same reason: they want to avoid the appearance of endorsing a third party.
In fact, this has been the topic of many lively conversations during the Social Media Compliance Workshops we’ve conducted across the country (more on that soon). Compliance professionals worry about the risk of the appearance of endorsements and marketing professionals bemoan that blocking those features run counter to the conversational nature of social media.
Recent guidance from FINRA, including Regulatory Notices 10-06 and 11-39 and the earlier 07-59, Guide to the Web for Registered Representatives, has clearly warned that content from third parties may be attributed to their firm it it’s been “explicitly or implicitly endorsed or approved” (or per the SEC, has been “adopted” or become “entangled”).
And for Financial Services firms, that means that they would be responsible for that content as if it were its own. All of which means additional record keeping, oversight and supervision of the appropriateness of the content and retention of communications. Bottom line: the perception of endorsements mean additional risk, something that firms would like to avoid, especially in the beginning stages of using social media.
Therefore, for now, firms are shying away from anything that feels like an endorsement and they are blocking that “Like” button”. But, with the introduction of Gestures, will firms allow now the use of more generic terms like “Watched” or the equivalent when they are released?
So what’s your view – and your corresponding attitude to risk? Is Watched ok or a gesture too far?
Embracing Social Business
Posted by SarahActiance in Enterprise 2.0, New Internet, Social Networking, Trends, Uncategorized, Web 2.0 on September 12, 2011
Not long ago we blogged about the proliferation of mobile devices being used by the next generation of consumers to access the new Internet and its impact on financial services. This was the topic of a recent webinar and accompanying white paper from Forrester Research, and it’s a growing concern for all businesses – how to create safe, effective marketing programs using the latest social media platforms that drive business in a measureable way.
I recently chatted with Erin Traudt, Research Director at IDC and their resident guru on all things social (Michael Fauscette , you’ll have to forgive me, I’m not lessening your guruness with that comment 
) , about the marketing capabilities we recently introduced in Socialite Engage. Erin pointed us to two public Insight reports on the IDC web site that define a new kind of Social Business Framework:
“The democratization and socialization of media through the social web has turned anyone into a publisher, reporter and/or critic – subsequently redefining influence. The social customer, employee, supplier and partner each have a voice and the means to use that voice at scale. And people are listening.”
Source: IDC
IDC’s definition of social business is companies using emerging technologies (like Web 2.0 and social media) to make cultural and organizational changes to drive business. According to the IDC report, “Social Business Framework: Using People as a Platform to Enable Transformation,” there are four steps to implementing a social business:
- Identify the market factors driving the need for change to social business. Market factors can include such things as competition, brand awareness, customer behavior, and the economy,
- Recognize social objectives you want to accomplish and why they matter. Social objectives are linked to business goals and include such elements as customer engagement, employee empowerment, partner enablement, and supplier engagement.
- Establish social outputs to support those social objectives. These are the mechanisms you use to share, such as tweets and Facebook posts. Content creation democratizes the process so customers and partners can join the conversation, and you have to consider your community as part of social output, i.e. those individuals who are connected in some way, ideally around your brand.
- Determine the platforms and applications you need to achieve your desired social outputs. These are the software tools that you need to build, deploy, and manage social applications, such as Jive, Lotus Connections, and Facebook, and, of course, tools like Socialite Engage.
As part of your social business strategy, you need to adopt business tools that measure the impact of social output and social media platforms. According to the IDC Insight report Determining the Value of Social Business ROI: Myths Facts and Potentially High Returns, most organizations don’t even know how to calculate ROI for traditional projects, let alone for social business. Identifying metrics to monitor social media engagement allows companies to optimize customer acquisition, decrease customer churn, and create upsell and cross sell opportunities. But to do that, you need to be able to gain control of your social media program and measure the effectiveness and ROI of social media programs.
According to the latest Social Business Survey from IDC, there are five primary reasons that end users use social media as part of social business:
- Acquire knowledge and ask questions;
- Share knowledge and contribute ideas;
- Communicate with customers;
- Create awareness about company product or service; and
- Communicate with internal colleagues.
As part of your social business strategy, you need to think of the impact your social business program has on your social media audience in terms of:
- Reach: How extensive is your online footprint and are you being effective at building an online following?
- Impact: What part of your online community is active, pay attention to your products and messages, and influencing others?
- Yield: How much revenue or new business can you link to active members of your social media community?
These are all factors we took into consideration in when we designed Socialite Engage. We understand that for certain industries it’s essential to not only promote conversation with preapproved content, but to understand how that content performs in achieving social business goals, and which channels are yielding the desired results.
As a firm, as a business, to gauge the effectiveness of a social business initiative, you have to be able to track aggregated engagement across different social media platforms, determine who your key influencers are, and how those influencers are affecting your bottom line. And that’s what we’ve done with Socialite Engage. We’ve designed the means to identify and track key connections into Socialite Engage, and ways to track their influence. We’ve also built in analytics to determine how those connections are affecting business, which channels and messages are having the greatest impact on sales, lead generation, or whatever initiative you have determined will drive your social business.
Embracing social business isn’t just about improving customer relations and increasing sales, it’s about changing the very DNA of your people and the organization. Developing a social business strategy means empowering your people, your customers, your partners, and your suppliers with new tools that can impact your brand and reputation, as well as your bottom line. As a result, you need new tools to monitor the conversations and measure their impact. That’s what our next generation of social business engagement tools is all about.
Follow my experiences in beta testing Socialite Engage – as I endeavor to change the social behavior and the results of social collaboration of Actiance team members, partners and customers. You can watch it all here – at blog.actiance.com (or follow us on Twitter @SarahActiance and @Actiance)
FINRA 11-39: Applause, Missing Pieces, and Users
Posted by SarahActiance in Compliance, FINRA, Malware, Social Networking, Web Security on August 25, 2011
In the week that “retweeted” was officially added to the Oxford English Dictionary, after only two years of use, FINRA beats the retweet and issues new guidelines on social media, just 18 months after 10-06 hit our doorsteps, and “So, what do you read into 11-39?” is the question on the tip of everyone’s tongue.
As expected, a few points are clarified; the latest guidance has become more prescriptive in some areas and less so in others. (Puzzled looks abound, I’m sure.) If you’d rather hear more about this, than to continue reading, please join me on a webinar Wednesday, August 31st at 10am EST and I’ll explain.
I’ll start with the missing pieces of 11-39
What’s missing is the specific reference to individual social networking sites (I bet that’s not what you were expecting). And for this, I applaud FINRA. Examples were given in 10-06 – Facebook was mentioned twice (OK, three times if you look at the endnotes), Twitter four times, and LinkedIn just the once. Interesting that, in the conversations I’ve had with wealth management firms and wire houses, it’s LinkedIn that is the network of choice.
Why my applause though? Good job, FINRA, I say, because you’ve recognized that this world moves very quickly. Three months ago, YouTube was the fastest growing social network. Then it was Google+. And now, as Google+’s new member growth falls by 30% a day to 700,000, we’re not sure anymore. That said, LinkedIn has added 20 million new profiles since its IPO in May and now boasts 120 million profiles. Equally, since January 1, 2011, we’ve tracked 938 changes across Facebook, LinkedIn, and Twitter (yes, really!).
Good job, FINRA, because you’ve recognized that loyalty in our social world is somewhat limited. And, that just because Facebook, LinkedIn, and Twitter are today’s Holy Trinity of social, it doesn’t necessarily mean that they will be tomorrow.
What else is good?
It’s also good to see clarification on business versus personal commentary – this reinforces what we’ve been saying for some time, that “the regulator is interested in the communications related to the business and when the individual is representing the business” – the advice we have been giving since January 2010, is NOT to go against the Facebook rules (for instance) and set up two profiles, but take advantage of Facebook giving you the ability to set up a profile for personal use and a page for professional use, because contrary to a lot of public opinion, you CAN do this – as a businessperson, you can set up a specific page for your business use (drop me a note if you want step-by-step instructions). The SEC itself has stated that the content of an electronic communications determines whether it should be preserved. Just like the FSA out of the UK does. It doesn’t matter about the modality.
I do believe that, as an industry, we are perhaps being somewhat short-sighted by thinking that you can absolutely separate personal from business communications in the social world. I think the lines will continue to blur (increasingly so) as we become more accustomed to social. I do believe we’ll see more guidance on this as time goes on.
What else is new?
A proposed social media site must be approved in the “form in which it will be launched.” FINRA is talking here about the launch of new social media sites. So, if you’re launching a new design, a new Twitter feed, for instance, then the graphics that you’re using, the imagery, and the actual site – the “wireframes” in design parlance – need to be part of the approvals process. Third Party Data Feeds are referenced also. FINRA reminds us that the firm is responsible for checking the proficiency of the vendor of the data and its ability to provide accurate data – and it must regularly review for red flags.
Don’t Delete!
In reaction perhaps to the number of new companies popping up purporting to provide control and manage social media, FINRA specifically calls out details on technology that automatically erases or deletes content, stating that this precludes the ability of the firm to retain the communications in compliance with their obligations under SEA Rule 17a-4, yet further into the 11-39 guidelines, FINRA details more about the deletion of inappropriate third-party content.
It’s clear that a record of communications that doesn’t contain the full record is no record at all. However, I do hold to the fact that some content simply has to be deleted. I can’t control the 750 million other Facebook users out there (heck, I can’t even control what my little brother says on Facebook), and not all of those users have the same filtering mechanism that I have when it comes to content. I’ve deleted some friends and banned others because their language would offend my Mother, who to me, is my ultimate Facebook controller. In a corporate environment, I certainly don’t want the Actiance brand associated with profanity, racism, or a host of other comments, that we automatically delete through the use of our Urban Dictionary.
But we do record the fact that they were made. We also record the fact that they were deleted. We also record what the page looks like before and after the delete. Belt and braces. It might not be on the social network anymore, but it’s in the archive.
Mobile IS mainstream, and network barriers have crumbled.
And, it’s clear to see that the growth of mobile is having an impact; 250 million of the 750 million active Facebook users use the site through a mobile device – and on mobile, they’re twice as active. It’s clear that firms are concerned about mobile, rightly so, but equally, that FINRA is being sensible about how firms operate and how they do business. And, not all of us use devices that are firm-owned to post content and collaborate on social networks. That’s the way the world is changing. It’s one of the biggest challenges of today’s CIO: the personally owned device (whatever that might be – iPhone, BlackBerry, Droid, iPad, Tablet, Netbook). FINRA reminds us that it’s the communications, not the device, that is important.
The Users, the pesky Users…
FINRA gives an even bigger call-out about training and education. Human beings, I’m convinced were put on earth to create chaos. And in a social world, we can do this very quickly and very easily. (I should at this point, before our CEO, @Kambwani, sees this, reference that this quote is mine and mine alone.) But equally, you don’t just give 20,000 financial advisors access to LinkedIn and expect that they know what to do. In a lot of instances, there is a generational gap, injecting social into the DNA of individuals doesn’t happen overnight. FINRA is dead-right by saying that training is important, that certification is important. And regular training is not just a one-off, because people forget when they’re on a social network. They forget who they’re connected to, and who might see their content.
We are, after all, as human beings, ultimately fallible. And, we have technology in every other area of our business lives to protect us (anti-spam and security in the email world), to stop us sending our bank account details to Nigeria or our intimate personal details to hackers, Web filtering in the Web world to stop us playing online poker all day, and maybe even Actiance to limit our usage of Farmville to a mere 30 minutes a day. In other words, we use technology to protect us against technology. And it goes without saying that using technology to protect us from malware infection (our very own @jaeho9kim wrote about this recently right here on this blog), from ourselves, and from malicious intent.
I think I’ve rattled on quite long enough now, so I’ll leave you with this final set of questions. Did 11-39 answer your questions? Did it raise more? What do you think it didn’t cover? Tune in next week for our webinar – and for thoughts that I’ve gathered recently, when I got together with 60 Financial Services Marketing, Compliance, and IT professionals and asked them what they thought FINRA should issue in terms of guidance.
Twitter Malware: It’s Coming After You
Posted by Jae Kim in Malware, Social Networking, Web 2.0, Web Security on August 23, 2011
 |
| I may need to wear a shirt like this in the office. |
Most readers of this blog are savvy social media users. I would include myself in that category. Well, I would have until last Sunday.
Yes, I will come out and admit it for once. I got suckered into clicking on a Twitter malware link that was forwarded to me by one of my ‘trusted’ venture friends. Now that I got that off my chest (and demonstrated that I could be just as naive as thousands of users out in the Internet), I think I can talk about this incident somewhat objectively.
It turns out that this particular malware spreads by getting a Twitter user to click on the shortened t.co URL that’s sent via private message. When an unsuspecting recipient clicks on the link, it automatically sends the same tweet to all of the recipient’s followers as a private message. Very sneaky.
It was quite an embarrassing moment when I realized what just happened (I even had to update the new Twitter app to follow the link on my iPhone). Thanks to a couple of my co-workers and good Twitter citizen @DevonAlderton, I came to my senses only after a few hours had passed. Once a few seconds of disillusionment of my malware ‘detect-o-meter’ had passed, I regained my composure to delete all of my private tweets to all my followers (thank goodness I don’t have Kim Kardashian’s follower base) and took remedial action to shore up my defenses.
The “Facebook Law” – First Law Prohibiting Teachers from Sending Private Messages on Social Networking Sites
Posted by belbey in Compliance, Enterprise 2.0, New Internet, Social Networking, Trends on August 16, 2011
In an effort to protect children from sexual misconduct by teachers, the Missouri Governor Jay Nixon recently signed the first law in the country designed to prohibit private communications between teachers and their students.
Specifically, the “Amy Hestir Student Protection Act” states “Teachers cannot establish, maintain, or use a work-related website unless it is available to school administrators and the child’s legal custodian, physical custodian, or legal guardian. Teachers also cannot have a nonwork-related website that allows exclusive access with a current or former student. (they have to wait until they hit 18) ” The bill also requires that school districts adopt written policies for teacher-student communications, including social media.
The bill, nicknamed, the “Facebook Law” has prompted discussions about the risks versus the rewards of using social media within an academic environment. Although they applaud efforts by legislators to protect children from sexual predators, many teachers , administrators, Facebook executives and even the ACLU, struggle with the possibilities that this law, and others that may follow, may diminish innovation in education, limit trust between student and teacher, impede personal privacy and prohibit free speech.
Regulated industries also struggle with elasticity between private and public personas and the risk and rewards of social media. For example, Financial Services firms need to comply with rules and regulations that govern the electronic communications between financial advisors and their clients. In an effort to take the least risky approach, most firms first 1) prohibit social media, then 2) recognize its value, and 3) search for ways that it can be used appropriately. Typically, this involves deploying technology that turns off certain features, monitors conversations and archives communications for later review.
Until similar technology solutions are available to school districts, there are some lessons from regulated industries to apply to the educational system:
- Craft written policies about appropriate electronic communications between teacher and student.
- Specifically define and prohibit “exclusive access” if mandated by law in your state.
- Educate teachers, students and parents on the policies. If social media is allowed, encourage all to participate.
- Check adherence to policies on an ongoing basis.
Specifically for educators, Facebook offers some options on maintaining a professional presence separate from your personal profile. You can create a friend list of just students, create a Page to broadcast information, and create a Group for collaboration.
Do you have any other suggestions?
You’re Not So Special After All
Posted by nleong in Compliance, Social Networking on July 19, 2011
Recently, Facebook told the pharmaceutical companies with a Facebook presence that they wouldn’t be able to disable comments starting on August 15. Up to now, pharma was the only industry on Facebook that was able to do this. Now, no more charity. Per Facebook’s mission to be a forum for open dialogue, the special treatment afforded pharma flew in the face of Facebook’s raison d’etre.
Pharma marketers wanted the ability to shut off comments due to the stringent requirements of the FDA and the lack of any social media-specific guidance. Historically, pharma companies have been very leery of social media and have been anxiously waiting for the FDA to issue more specific guidance regarding the use of social media for advertising.
It’s been almost two years since the FDA held a public hearing to solicit feedback on the use of social media…and still no official guidance. There certainly are benefits for the industry and consumers regarding social media. Consumers are increasingly turning to social media to gather information on diseases, treatments, new medical devices, etc. If used properly, social media can be a very effective medium to relay pertinent information to consumers. If used inappropriately, well, that’s where the conservative nature of the industry rears its head.
Just to give an example, pharma is required to report any adverse effects of their drugs or off-label information to the FDA. This means any posts or discussion threads on Facebook, if they contain incorrect information or any adverse effects, must notify the FDA. You can imagine, given the amount of content flowing through the social networks, the scope of potential events that would trigger a report to the FDA. Now, you can see how why pharma has been reluctant to allow comments on Facebook pages.
So, August 15th is an important date. Pharma advertising may not make up a big chunk of Facebook’s revenue right now, but that’s not to say it couldn’t somewhere down the line. Healthcare is big business in the US. Once the FDA finally issues its social media guidance (your guess is as good as mine as to when) and pharma starts to adopt technology to monitor and control posts to social media sites, you can be sure that the FDA will cast a very vigilant eye to see what they’ve unleashed. Perhaps a Frankenstein? Or maybe the Messiah?
We’ll just have to wait and see.
