We were on the road yesterday when the Boston Marathon bombings happened. Ed learned about it on Twitter at a rest stop and then we caught the odd update on the radio as I drove home to Toronto from Ottawa. It felt strange to be so disconnected in the midst of such of a scary tragedy. I’ve gotten used to immediately tuning in to Twitter to see the reactions or, more often than not, learning about the news on Twitter itself. But in a way it was nice. It was nice to be able to dwell on the enormity of the events quietly with my family. (Whispering to Ed while the kids babbled obliviously in the backseat.) It was nice not to have to wade through all the knee-jerk editorializing of every person I’ve ever connected with. It was sad and lonely and it felt right.
Alas, we arrived home.
Checking in with Facebook I found this thread on a private group for Canadian bloggers that I belong to.
Update: Members of the Facebook group have asked that I remove a screenshot of the conversation (although identities were protected). I hadn’t considered that I may have been breaching anyone’s privacy and I apologize.
So, in a nutshell, someone posted the following suggestion: “If any of you run automated tweets/updates, you may want to consider turning them off out of respect for the Boston tragedy.” There were four or five replies right away that suggested they didn’t see any reason to stop auto tweets.
A simple and courteous reminder to think about any automated tweets you may have going out was met with defensiveness and disdain. OMG, they basically said, how are we supposed to wade through the ceaseless string of tragedies and know when to stop tweeting about our toothpaste giveaways? The show must go on!
It was a consensus with the exception of the person who posted the original question and continued to stick to her guns and the eminently reasonable and ethically astute Emma Willer, who said:
Why would you delete the thread? This is an interesting conversation to have. Do you proceed with scheduled tweets about funny cat photos and the latest cereal brand when something kind of bad is consuming people’s thoughts? I can see both sides of theĀ debate. I might want to click on the cat photos as a distraction. But a twitter party about cereal would really bug me right now. Debate is healthy. Different approaches in these circumstances are interesting.
It’s too much to ask, it doesn’t matter and who’s to say that one tragedy is worse than another anyway? That was the basic sentiment.
So of course I had to chime in:
That really got them going. Unfortunately, now backs were up against walls and chips firmly planted on shoulders. Everyone dug into their position and it didn’t take long for people to start crying about being judged and wondering why we don’t just support one another. (Even though the original post was just as helpful and supportive a piece of advice as I could ever hope to get.)
Finally, Laura O’Rourke of Mommy Miracles chimed in with the perfect balance of reason and diplomacy. She said what I should have said:
Because here’s the takeaway.
It is crass to knowingly continue to promote irrelevant content in the wake of a tragedy, especially sponsored content and branded Twitter parties. It is off-putting and makes you look bad even if it was an oversight. In fact, there is a very good case to be made against automating any social media content for this very reason.
Tragedies that happen in our own backyards are going to hit closer to home than those that happen across the world. Our social media backyards are bigger than ever, but there are still cultural ties that bind our networks. These deaths are not more important per se than those of children in war-torn countries, but we care about them more. They could have been us. And the socio-political implications of terrorist attacks in the United States scare me more than those happening in the Middle East (even though I’m Canadian). They just do.
If you are not sure if a given tragedy is important enough to cancel a Twitter party (and I do understand that a lot of work and planning go into organinzing a successful one) or to suspend your auto tweets, then just look at your own feed. Take the temperature of your network because, ultimately, it doesn’t matter if it feels wrong to you. What matters is that it feels wrong to others.
THAT’s what is going to make you look like an asshole.
32 replies on “Auto Tweets in the Wake of Tragedy: A Conversation”
What this boils down to is “use your common sense”. Sometimes the show has to go on and sometimes it doesn’t.
Considering the wishes of your network is good advice. People work hard to make their parties and campaigns successful. Time it wrong (whether it’s during a tragedy, or even just a big event on TV like the Olympics) and you’ll be drowned out or muted. At worst you’ll be snarked about. Which sounds small but could be suicidal for a campaign.
I think people are looking for a rule to follow or a best practice. The point proven here is that there isn’t one. These decisions happen on feel.
I really wish people would quit complaining about being judged every time someone doesn’t pat them on the back *and* agree with them 100%. We all judge, and we’re all being judged on what we say online whether we like it or not. We have to own our opinions and choices.
Great point about the timing not always being about respect. I remember scratching my head about a Twitter party during the Oscars (or was it the Superbowl?). Why would you bother?
I absolutely agree that auto-tweets were not the right way to go yesterday. However, as I mentioned on a few threads, the twitter-police who were out in full force within MOMENTS of the bombing are just as terrible. Though we have become conditioned to expect everything immediately, immediately is not always possible. For instance, what if Ed had auto-tweets planned yesterday? Was he to pull the entire family over as soon as he heard what happened and stop at the side of the road, or go looking for wifi to re-route those tweets?
Not everybody’s first reaction was, oh my god! People are dying! I must remember my auto-tweets! So no, I don’t agree with the people you quote above who think, meh, the show must go on, but the righteous public shamers who were out in full force within the hour (Unmarketing comes to mind, shocker) are no better.
Ah. You see, I missed all that and it may be why people reacted so strongly to the suggestion. I absolutely agree that instant public shaming is even worse. I was just so taken aback at the strong reactions to what seemed like a nice (if obvious) reminder.
I agree with you Karen. I didn’t like the public shaming of the auto-tweets. They are automatically tweeted for a reason – people might not be on top of Twitter at those times. That’s why it was a courtesy to jump into our private networks and make these kind of reminders. But great point about extending grace to the auto-tweeters too.
Yes, it was the near instant shaming that got to me, too. Not only are people not always immediately available to turn tweets off, but sometimes you don’t grasp the enormity of a situation right away. Yesterday when all this started going down, I was about to get on a conference call while putting the last few finishing touches on a post. I published the post, then hopped over to Twitter for a minute and saw that something was going on at the marathon; honestly my first thoughts were not “terrorist attack” but some kind of electrical mishap or something. I tweeted the post and listened to the call while keeping half an eye on the twitter stream. It took me about 30 minutes to fully realize what was going on, and then I felt bad for having published a rather fluffy promotional Tweet, but it was too late to do anything about it. That said, I don’t think there’s anything wrong with a gentle reminder at all. It probably helped a lot of people who were focused on the news and not even thinking about their auto-tweets. I also agree with Rebecca that this might be a good opportunity to re-think the idea of having MANY tweets scheduled throughout a day. One or two isn’t likely to make you look too bad, but a stream of them…
I completely agree with you here. I was not assuming anyone tweeting something unrelated or marketing-like was being insensitive. And I certainly wouldn’t have taken the time to call anyone out on it. (“In light of today’s events, we’d like to sell you something or promote our brand” type tweets would disgust me, though.)
Aaaannnd, I just saw a screen shot of some epicurious tweets that seem to have done just that, ick.)
I do think it is a PR reps job to be on top of this type of thing.
The main take away though, its that once again, you have brought up toothpaste, proving what a jerk you are.
smooches.
L
Amen! Awesome post, Rebecca. Your conclusion is spot on. It isn’t a tragedy popularity contest, it is about respecting what our network cares about.
I’m of the opinion that it’s a tweet and that is all it is. Honestly if people are worried about a tweet than they are missing the whole point as far as I’m concerned. As grown adults we have the control over what we give out attention too. My rule of thumb – will this matter tomorrow, next week, next year, in ten years, when I die. Where something hits on this scale that is how I react to something.
I am part of the group you mention. I thought the original poster had shared a helpful reminder to the group, and then I moved on. Next time I log-in to facebook, the whole thread had gone wild (and a touch nasty).
I agree with Karen that the righteous public shamers are not necessary, but I did agree with UnMarketing that it was shameful for companies to jump in saying they would donate to the cause if you liked/RT’d/purchased product from them. It’s one thing for an individual to tweet cat photos (sure, doesn’t bother me) but for a company to try and BENEFIT from a tragedy? Disgusting.
Hear, hear.
I found it fascinating how so many people were talking about auto tweets in the wake of tragedy. I think people were overwhelmed and felt sad and helpless and directed their ire somewhere they felt they could change something. The reality is, I ignored auto tweets. But I didn’t ignore assholes. I just unfollowed them. (Looking at you, Guy Kawasaki.)
Yes! Guy Kawasaki I was not impressed with at all yesterday.
I only unfollowed one person yesterday. It wasn’t just that her account posted a string of auto-tweets right in the middle of the tragedy, it was that the word “sponsored” was misspelled on EVERY SINGLE ONE. Some things are just intolerable. :)
ugghh…just read the Kawasaki thread. Wow.
I unfollowed him ages ago because I can’t handle the ego, but just went back to read the thread – unbelievable.
Like Karen, I was a bit annoyed with just how quickly there were a ton of tweets in my timeline complaining about the automated tweets. They started less than an hour after the news broke, ferpetessake. I don’t assume that everyone else is glued to their Twitter feed just because I am. The people who set up the autotweets might not even have heard.
When the Newton tragedy occurred I didn’t hear about it for several hours because I was busy that day and wasn’t online. I didn’t have autotweets set up, but if I had I would not have known they were going out at an inappropriate time.
I was more astounded by instances of people live-tweeting about banal or self-centered things in the midst of it all, but those tweets were often followed up with tweets that said, “OMG, I hadn’t heard the news yet when I tweeted about that…please ignore my last tweet!” And then I realize that I, too, have hopped on twitter to send off a vent-tweet without reading my timeline first to see what else is going on. So you know, I think I was a bit quick to judge in a couple of instances, too.
I was at a business women’s conference yesterday and didn’t see what was going on in Boston. A comedian was on the stage, entertaining us and sharing her story. It wasn’t until someone DM’d me a suggestion to quiet the tweets that I found out about the tragedy. I wasn’t being insensitive leading up to that point, I just didn’t know. I think there needs to be a little bit of grace given and received in these situations.
Personally, it’s gotten to a point for me that whenever a big news story happens, my feed is FAR more filled with Twitter police than it is anyone exhibiting the so-called bad behaviors. It’s FAR more off putting, to me, to see people using the time to tell other adults how they should be behaving (how to tweet, what to say, how to act (let’s all be a little kinder, let’s think of this, let’s remember this or that), what we should be saying to our children), all phrased in a preaching/telling/instructing, flat out POLICING manner, than it is to see any of these slightly tone deaf tweets and what nots.
Honestly, it’s just not the place of adults to tell other adults how to behave. If someone continues with their PR business and it loses them some audience, it’s probably between them and their clients. It’s a good topic for should we/shouldn’t we discussion, sure, but not DURING. The active policing DURING gets more unfollowing/”network” shrinking from me than anything else.
My feeling is to each his own. The original post was a valid suggestion. I do however feel that taking content from a private group and making it public is not the right thing to do either. Yes I know that anything online is there for ever, but there are some expectations of privacy within a private group.
I appreciate now that some people see this as a betrayal of privacy. I am sorry for that. I merely wanted to illustrate a reaction and use that as a launching place for discussion. I did not want to call anyone out and made sure to protect identities. I didn’t consider it might be out of bounds and apologize.
The world is so judgemental already. Let’s stop judging. Everyone is entitled to their opinion and actions. I don’t think it’s fair to expect every person to pull the plug on their marketing – and then judge them if they don’t. It is sometimes simply not possible. And it is, in the end, not going to change the tragedy. It is not necessarily a sign of disrespect if you don’t either. I think auto-tweets are the one thing that you do let go on. But posting pictures of your kitty, or jokes, or showing up live and in person, disregarding the tragedy is more tasteless. I do think big brands, who have teams of people in place around the clock to manage social media have a different social responsibility than the rest of us… they have the resources to pull their auto-tweets so they should.
And as for the private group, I’d call it a lesson learned. Your intentions were good and your conversation was fabulous! This is something that needed to be chatted about and the private group provided an important backdrop to the conversation. Sometimes you can’t use the “evidence” you want, so perhaps this crossed a line. But barely, IMHO. Because in the end, the outcome is greater than the damage caused and nobody really is hurt in this process. Just hurt feelings. I applaud you for creating a good conversation and appreciate your response to those who might be angry. You seem like a good egg. xx
Thank you, Kim. I appreciate you taking the time to comment (and thanks for standing up for me in that other group too.)
So, when do things go back to “normal”? 6 hours after? 12? The fact that this post was written at all seems pretty hypocritical, no? An offence just as bad as your “auto tweeting during tragedy?” Screenshots from a PRIVATE group and bullying.
Thank you for writing this. While I am not judging anyone who chose to do one thing or the other, I personally thought that it would reflect poorly on me and any brand I represent to be tweeting or posting on FB in the hours following the attack. Some might think social media is “meaningless” when it comes to the human emotion following such a tragedy, but it’s actually not…it’s HUGE. In fact, social media is in the forefront whenever huge news is happening. So, yes, I do think that it can come off as insensitive if you (the royal “you”) are blasting tweets about your giveaway or your article or your review while most of the people on Twitter/Facebook are dealing with a terrorist attack. And, yes, I do think it’s our responsibility, as we’re essentially PR for the brand we’re working for, to take into consideration how the public perceives us. When you tweet in a professional capacity, others’ perception of you IS your reality. That being said, if you disagree, that’s fine. I’m not judging anyone for what they did or didn’t do…I just am providing my perspective and how I chose to handle it. I didn’t want to feel the wrath of those who would judge me based upon my social media behavior following a tragedy. But we all deal with it differently, and that’s OK.
I don’t want to get into the whole debate of should I or shouldnt I tweet toothpaste posts during a tragedy, frankly I think what happened in a “a private group for Canadian bloggers” should stay in that private group.
Would love to hear everyone’s thoughts on Chris Brogan’s take: http://humanbusinessworks.com/radioshow/69boston/
About a week ago, a gunman entered a daycare in Gatineau Quebec and shot another man in front of the children. He then went to another part of the daycare and tried to kill his estranged wife (she escaped). He tried to set the daycare on fire (unsuccessfully). He then went into another room and ended his own life.
I learned about this tragedy, which happened a few kilometres away, in the city where my children go to school, on twitter. I learned about it in when all we knew was “there was a shooting at a Gatineau daycare”. On twitter, I was searching for more information, trying to learn what happened, outraged and grieving that something like this could happen in my community. It consumed the rest of my day.
But on twitter, other than a few local people, everyone was still chatting about the weather, their lunch, their toothpaste giveaway, and funny cat pictures. It felt inappropriate. It felt wrong. SOMEONE WAS SHOOTING PEOPLE IN A DAYCARE and everyone else went on with their lives. What was wrong with them? That’s how I felt last week.
Now this week, the bombs go off in Boston. And that is different how? Maybe because more people know about or care about Boston than about Gatineau?
Personally, I don’t ever auto tweet, so turning off auto-tweets isn’t an issue. But don’t think a tragedy in Boston is more reason for the world to stop turning than a tragedy in Gatineau (my back yard) or one in Africa (someone else’s back yard). I don’t think children being shot at in Newtown is more reason for the world to stop and listen than children being shot in Norway.
What happened in Boston was horrible for sure, but I don’t understand the outrage over people continuing to tweet (auto or not) about other things.
I think there are two issues. One is that it may be disrespectful to promote blog posts/giveaways/products/etc in the wake of a tragedy. The other is that you will upset and/or offend people by doing so. Where we draw the line is, I think, very subjective and depends on both your personal feelings and the reaction in your social media network.
I’m also not talking about the whole world. Should multinational corporations show deference to tragedies around the world? Absolutely. Especially in those communities. The rest of us live where we live and our reactions will be gauged accordingly.
That said, I think those international tragedies (like the Norway shooting or the Japan tsunami,eg.) that permeate international boundaries and resonate with us all as fellow humans should be(and often are)accorded the same amount of respect.
[…] from Ottawa to Toronto while Ed naps because he needs to rest. I could then stay up late writing a well-received post that I was alsoĀ vilifiedĀ for because I was too bleary-eyed to properly consider how people might […]