Monday, August 27, 2012

Facebook: Thumbs up to moderation



Smart Company recently published an 'Ultimate Guide to Facebook Moderation'. In it, Patrick Stafford raises many issues that businesses using Facebook now face that they didn't just a short time ago.

"The concept of monitoring and moderating the messages made on Facebook walls is odd. The practice didn’t even exist three or four years ago. But recent legal tussles show Facebook moderation isn’t just something you should do because it’s good business. It’s a legal obligation. Smart businesses will be aware of a finding by the Advertising Standards Board, and a subsequent affirmation from the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission, that small businesses have an obligation to take down misleading or deceptive posts on their wall. These messages can constitute ads, and if you don’t take care of them, it could result in massive fines. Businesses have been irate about this, suggesting it’s even more work for them to keep track of. But James Griffin, co-founder of reputation management company SR7, says this should have been the case for many businesses when they first set up their pages – and it exposes some laziness (emphasis added)."

In the article,  Stafford raises key points about setting up an online community on Facebook, key points that I think a lot of businesses have not heeded in the rush to be on Facebook simply for the purpose of being 'on' Facebook. The role of moderator would be a lot easier if these companies had spent time developing a strategy before simply jumping on one of the latest social media bandwagons.

Some of the key points raised in the article include:
  • Asking yourself what you want a Facebook page for. Have a strategy and envisage what feedback/interaction you would like to create;
  • Setting standards and having clear guidelines for posts;
  • Warning against misleading comments - even if a comment is positive it may not be accurate;
  • Don't delete controversial comments.

Interestingly he warns against regarding 'likes' as feedback, a point I brought up in our tutorial discussion last week. A lot of likes doesn't always correlate to engagement. Similarly, negative posts by consumers that garner alot of 'likes' may not be the death by social media or translate to loss of business that many may expect. As in the case of the Target social media story I mentioned in my last post, 44,000 'likes' of a mother's negative feedback to Target obviously demonstrates that a lot of Facebook users also share a similar point of view, however it could also simply be fellow consumers having an easy dig at a corporate entity. Sure it isn't one to ignore complelely, as 44,000 likes has spread one consumer's feedback much further than it would have ten years ago through 'Word of Mouse' and brought coverage of the issue to traditional media, but if I were moderating a page I'd be more inclined to analyse comments rather than the simplistic 'like'.

But back to the point I emphasised in the first section of Smart Company's 'Ultimate Guide to Facebook Moderation': Have companies become lazy in their Facebook moderation? Has the proverbial horse bolted and now companies must play catch up to avoid or better manage their own potential social media #Fail? Should companies re-assess their presence on Facebook and perhaps opt for another platform for social engagement?

I think setting up a Facebook page is the easy part, but constant vigilance is the price to be paid for wanting to be in that space. Laziness has crept into multi-national companies AND small businesses. Social media moderators must access their platforms daily, respond, and if a response can't be supplied, as at least an acknowledgement that the post or comment will be assessed and responded to as soon as possible.

9 comments:

  1. Reading your post it reminded me how risk management focused business must be today. It is not just construction and heavy industry that has to manage high risks that will come back to bite if they are ignored. You don't start a roadworks job without warning signs to prevent loss of life, so you can't really complain about needing to plan your Facebook page to avoid loss of reputation!

    ReplyDelete
  2. Hi Sam, interesting topic. I would love to know more about moderation and particularly - to what degree communities self-moderate - in terms of answering queries from others, but also in terms of shutting down the obnoxious. Does this happen, or do we always need a moderator, at all times? Can't we trust our communities (to a degree), or is this ridiculously naive?

    Do you think you'll talk to some moderators to find out more about the challenges, or is there a lot already out there about moderation? Guess I'll find out won't I... Look forward to your posts. Winsome

    ReplyDelete
  3. Thanks Ian and Winsome. Ian I couldn't agree more. There is an element of risk management about social media, however this shouldn't be a deterrent to engaging. Just as major contruction jobs go ahead, so should social engagement. If it is done properly, the opportunities far out weigh the risks.
    Winsome, An interesting point you raise about always needing a moderator. Through my research that is one thing I will comment on - I'm just guessing but I think user-generated platforms like chat forums may operate without an official moderator, however brand based exercises run by companies may need moderation simply to engage further with 'prosumers'
    Thanks to you both.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Hi Sam I agree with you "setting up a Facebook page is the easy part, but constant vigilance is the price to be paid". I found this article "Coles accused in Facebook of ‘making money from cancer" which demonstrate our point: The post has been liked by more than 800 people and has 63 comments. However, Coles keeps on silence.
    The question-Have Coles become lazy in their Facebook moderation?
    More info: http://mumbrella.com.au/coles-accused-of-making-money-from-cancer-112647

    ReplyDelete
  5. Hi Consuelo, it seems they did respond, however they haven't exactly answered the question raised by the consumer. With the supermarket duopoly that exists in Australia, most poeple will probably move to shopping at Woolworths for a time until they return to Coles out of necessity. One to keep track of I think.
    Thanks!

    ReplyDelete
  6. Hi Sam, I'm finding this challenge myself with my exercise for class. Setting up the page is easy. Moderation is the hard part. And then it comes down to quality over quantity. I want to post/contribute every day but if I don't have anything of value to say, am I better not to? I look forward to reading more. Sarah.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Good point Sarah, Is a moderator/community manager's role to create content, moderate the group's content, or both? Is it better to be highly engaging, or simply let teh group steet content? I guess it all comes down to the strategy you have for your group. Thanks for your input.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Hi Samuel, This is a really interesting question. I've just been reading a report on cyberhate and one of the comments it makes is that, left unmoderated, it actually only takes a small number of racist / sexist / vilifying comments can quite quickly become a self-replicating troll-fest as everyone who disagrees leaves the site. I'd like to think that the difference between legitimate criticism and harassment would be clear, but some recent examples suggest that moderators either don't understand the distinction, or overreact and create more problems for themselves. Agree that constant monitoring and setting up clear guidelines and training for your moderators is critical. Catherine

    ReplyDelete
  9. Thanks Catherine, your point: "but some recent examples suggest that moderators either don't understand the distinction." lends itself quite well to a issue I have been watching on twitter under the #ccRoxon hastag. When addressing Data Rentention: http://socmedmod.blogspot.com.au/2012/09/data-retention-political-influence-on.html on YouTube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R8_VHR_mtCQ&feature=youtu.be Nicola's office has disabled comments, leading one to suspect that her own office can't distiguish between legitimate criticism and harassment.

    ReplyDelete