Full disclosure and personal branding

The other week I was presenting a social media bootcamp to a group, and we set up a twitter account. I offered the suggestion that members create a twitter screen name that was a combination of their name and their organization, and one member asked about how people in the past used to use less-personally-identifying monikers. My response was that as social media is becoming increasingly legitimized as a source of credible information, there is a general movement towards using proper names.

What do you mean, he doesn’t work here?

In the case of the bootcamp where we were educating members of an organization in how to incorporate social media into their work activities, the use of a name and an affiliation with the organization helps to establish credibility. If a tweet comes from ComcastCares, we know it’s coming from Frank Eliason. If there were no Frank Eliason at Comcast, do you think that Twitter account would still be open and running? Comcast is obviously aware of Frank’s activities and use of their company name, which gives his actions credibility on the behalf of his company. Conversely, there is an increased trust factor when engaging with “Frank” rather than some nameless/faceless Twitter account.

Would you cite RunnrGirl417 as a credible source?

When we share information, we’re often asked for the source of the information. “A friend of a friend” is fine for certain types of information, but in many cases we want to be sure we’re passing along correct information. If someone is willing to associate her personal brand with the information she’s sharing, we put slightly more faith that the information is factual.

Does unbiased journalism even exist?

When blogs first came out, the question of credibility came up – these were opinion pieces, not researched, unbiased journalistic fact. But we must ask ourselves: is anything truly without some bias? We may seek out a particular news source because we know to some extent how they will slant the story. This is even more apparent with a blog or a twitter feed written by a single individual. But in this case, we are aware of the bias and take that into account.

Indeed, “getting to know” these biases and opinions of an individual may actually help us in understanding their positions on matters. We may seek to read opinions by someone with whom we either vehemently agree or disagree, for this very reason. If I know a friend or acquaintance has had a particular experience, I may take that into account when I get information from them. I don’t have this richer subtext when I read something by a nameless newspaper staff writer.

Social media is as much about customer service as PR

When you call the customer service line for a product or service, the person you speak with gives you his or her name. We relate better to individuals than “the voice on the other end of the line”. As human beings we have a tendency to personify: what cartoon doesn’t have walking, talking animals, and who among us hasn’t named their vehicle? People relate better to other people; so let them foster a relationship with an individual, not a corporation (After all, if you’ve seen The Corporation, you know that large organizations exhibit the personality traits of psychopaths, and who wants a relationship with a psychopath?).

See below – who has the accountability for the “I” statement?

In coming up with an online persona, do we need to try to be all things to all people? I don’t think so; I maintain several twitter feeds to attempt to help filter the information for different audiences. But at the core, the messages sent from @afhill, @afhill262 and @AndreaWorldways are all consistent in tone and message. Together they give a richer vision of who I am and what I believe….

• Subscribe to the RSS feed
• Get Email updates
• Reading: Full disclosure and personal branding (by @afhill)Tweet This
• Stumble It
• Add to del.icio.us
• Share on Facebook
• Email to a friend