Transparency on Twitter

One of our concerns as Twitter lovers and founders of a social media marketing agency is how to handle tweeting about the products or services we love when the products happen to be connected to our clients. We strive to be as transparent as possible, not just because we fear the wrath of the FTC or being called out by bloggers and Twitterers we know and trust, but because it has always been in our nature to be as crystal clear as possible about everything we are doing.

From the moment Sheila, Cat, and I decided to form our company, we're shared our progress every step of the way on our blogs, on Facebook, and especially on Twitter where we've loved getting immediate feedback on our plans and ideas. We are--all three of us--long-time social media power users (when I say "social media," I also include blogging).  We have always been completely transparent when it comes to product reviews and giveaways on our blogs because that's our style. It helps that we all have separate review blogs, but even when we mention products on our main sites, we are clear about how we obtained it. (If you doubt how serious I am about this, just check out the name of my review site and the non-nonsense style in which I review products. I'm not trying to get over on anyone.)

I've been blogging since 2003. Back then there was no such thing as ads on blogs, no Twitter, no Facebook, and companies were just starting to figure out how to connect their brands with bloggers. People blogged because they loved writing and creating community around their writing (whatever the topic), not to review products, share coupons, or host giveaways.

Brands perceived bloggers to be influential over their communities of readers and they started reaching out.  Bloggers took, and plenty of bloggers bungled those write-ups making it seem as if they really did love that powder or paste or cleanser or wax or bleach*, when really, they got it for free and therefore felt obligated to say something positive about it.

On the flip side, plenty of bloggers didn't bungle those write-ups.  Plenty of bloggers have always been above-board about where and how they got a free product and shared their honest feelings about it.

When it comes to Twitter, we feel it's just as important to be on the level, but it's harder since we're limited to 140 characters. We tweet about our clients using our "business" Twitter handle, @clevergirlscoll, but there are times when we re-tweet using our personal handles. If it's for something like one of our Twitter parties, the fact that we include the "@clevergirlscoll" right up front makes it clear that it's a work-related event.  See example below:

@citymama RT @CleverGirlsColl: RSVP now 4 the #cgc #ProjectRunway finale twitter party! Prizes from #Timex & MomMadeThat.com! http://bit.ly/3WAMDP

Not everyone on Twitter may know that Sheila, Cat, and I are associated with @clevergirlscoll, and we often don't have the space to explain it in 140 characters, but our Twitter profiles are very clear about our role as founders and principals of a social media marketing agency for anyone doing a little digging.

Today I re-tweeted a tweet from one of our clients, Yummie Tummie and I added (client) at the end of it.  See example below:

@citymama RT @yummietummie: Check out the new Yummie Tummie Undercover! The shaping panel is covered w/stretch cotton! http://bit.ly/3RIuGp (client)

I do want my followers to know about this product since many of my followers are women who wear shapewear, but I also want my followers to know exactly why I am tweeting. Yes, I love Yummie Tummie, and yes, they also happen to be a Clever Girls Collective client.

Here are some other ways people on Twitter are handling transparency.  Scott Monty (@scottmonty), head of Social Media at Ford does it thusly:

RT @ScottMonty: The official car of CES: the 2010 Ford Taurus. The Taurus? Yep. http://bit.ly/1uakg4 [Congrats! - and yes, disc: client]

Karen Untereker, digital strategist at Ogilvy handles transparency like this:

@unterekless My sponsor Yoplait is offering a $1.25 coupon off new 100 calorie Yoplait Delights! http://bit.ly/4fv2sV

Melanie Notkin, founder of Savvy Auntie (@SavvyAuntie) handles it a variety of ways. When the TNT show Saving Grace sponsored some of her tweets earlier this year, Melanie wrote a thoughtful post about why she was doing it and let her followers know that her sponsored tweets would contain a special hashtag: 

Because these weekly events are sponsored, I will add [sp] to each tweet. The hashtag "#SavingGrace" will be used to keep track of the conversation for all those following.

Melanie also tweets directly about her relationship to the folks who sponsor her as she did today:

@savvyauntie I'd like to thank @americanexpress for inviting me to see Jon Bon Jovi at Alice Tully Hall last night. Awesome experience #amexjovi

So far there doesn't seem to be a de facto standard as to how to handle sponsored- or client-related tweets, but from what see out there, we have some very clear examples from some extremely conscientious people to follow.

—Stefania Pomponi Butler

* a nod to Free To Be You and Me

Comments

[Kimberly/Mom in the City]

I have received requests to do sponsored twitter campaigns, but it's not my cup of tea. It doesn't bother me if other people do it though.

The "gray" area to me is when I initially receive a product for review and want to talk about it later on twitter. It seems a little crazy to put (sp) every time I refer to a product indefinitely just because I initially received it as a review item. (It would be different if the company was a client/paying me money to advance their business.)

It will be interesting to see how this whole transparency issue plays out...

[Room 704]

We've included a $ before/after our sponsor related tweets (most of the time anyway).

[Daily_Pinch]

I am so glad that you brought this topic up. It's been hot news among bloggers, but for me, even more personal.

Like you, I have been blogging since 2003. However, I quit. Why? The answer is simple. There were too many bloggers that I encountered locally who were having great success by blowing smoke up others peoples rears (sorry, no other way to put it). They were receiving products, writing reviews with no bias, no pros, no cons. Nothing...and that's all they did.

There was no substance, there was no voice. It was look at this great product I was sent and now I am going to give it away to you.

When they tweet it, there is no reference to a client or them being a "consultant" to these companies. It's just them saying "Hey! I have this great product I am giving away."

There is not mention as to how they came across it, if it was sponsored, a hashtag, nothing. I am not going to stop tweeting, but would like to see guidelines put into place.

But, isn't that the companies responsibility as well? If they are going to sponsor you and there is a contract, then you are responsible for what you say/tweet/blog. End of story.

CGC, Scott Monty, Karen Untereker and Melanie Notkin tweet with integrity. It's a standard other Twitterer's should uphold, respect and emulate.

[Susan Getgood]

I think your approach is very reasonable Stefania.

To Kimberly's question, re: a product you reviewed in past & wish to discuss again. Knowing you, you were totally transparent in the initial review. If you decide to tweet about it again in the future, why not link to the initial post. Not in every tweet in a stream, just the first time. Would probably be useful to your Twitter followers anyway, to know what you thought of the product.

To Daily_Pinch: Absolutely. Under the guidelines the company has a responsibility to provide guidance to bloggers about their disclosure obligations. If it does NOT, it can be held liable. I wrote about this on Marketing Roadmaps this week. (http://getgood.com/roadmaps)

[Maria Ogneva]

Ultimately, it doesn't matter which syntax you use, as long as you are consistent. Taking a page from @savvyauntie's playbook, it's a good idea to do a longer introductory post that explains the client engagement and what kinds of tweets to expect, so the readers and community members have some kind of context.

When you introduce sponsored tweets, just make sure that you use the same syntax, so your readers can train themselves what to look for, whether it's a #, (sp) or (client).

[Linsey K / KrolikLegal / Me Too You]

Hey Clever Girls!

In my view, like blogging disclosures, twitter disclosures should really match YOUR voice. Perhaps a standard will emerge - it makes sense that it would given the limited number of characters Twitter give you. However you do it, it needs to be EASY for readers to understand the disclosed relationship. Is a #sp hashtag easy to understand for the uninitiated twitter follower? I'm not sure...I am glad to see you all are thinking about this - your all's past integrity is guiding you here.

(Disclosure: Clever Girls is a client of mine, however nothing in this comment is legal advice.)

Linsey

[Scott]

Susan's suggestion of linking to the original post is certainly a solid one. Also, I don't know if you're aware of cmp.ly - a very cool service at http://cmp.ly with different levels of association, to help people clearly understand why you're saying what you're saying.

If used consistently over time, it could become pretty prevalent.

Scott Monty
Global Digital Communications
Ford Motor Company
http://thefordstory.com

[SavvyAuntie]

Thanks for including me in this great post, Stefania. I most often use [sp] in tweets that refer to a paid client. Or, I'm more literal, stating that so-and-so is a sponsor.

It would be ironic to call my brand "Savvy Auntie" if I wanted to pull the wool over my audience's eyes. Not disclosing just makes me, and my clients, look dumb.

If I ever do mention a product or brand in a tweet, and don't acknowledge it was sponsored in some way, it wasn't.

By the way, The @AmericanExpress tweet you cited above wasn't a paid sponsorship, but rather an acknowledgment of an invitation to a concert. Yes, I was happy to tweet that I was there because the concert was for a great cause.. but that was never a condition of accepting the invitation.

[Unterekless]

Thanks so much for including me! I agree with everything you said and often use [disc: client] to flag posts. I also think bios are a good place to, at the very least, allude to a relationship. For example, by making it clear in my bio that I work for a PR firm, I try and make my professional bias visible.

In general, I'm of the opinion that any acknowledgment of a professional relationship or affiliation on Twitter is a step in the right direction even if it's not as thorough/perfect as it could be. I believe that as the platform evolves, we'll find new and better ways to disclose relationships in detail.

In the spirit of this post and interest of full disclosure, Yoplait is not a sponsor/client of mine. (I actually don't remember sending the tweet you cited, but I do think yogurt and coupons are both great!)

[Jennifer James]

Great post! This is something I've been thinking about a lot. I'll now be putting "client" in my tweets just so everyone is clear!