Monthly Archives: December 2012

Trust Is the Core Issue in Instagram PR Controversy

Trust Us, We're Experts Image medium_35555985

This week’s Instagram flap once again shows how quickly a crisis can escalate when a company is perceived to have crossed a social mores line.

After reports circulated around news sites and the Internet that Instagram (which is owned by Facebook) essentially considered your photos its photos—and therefore could use or even sell them without your permission—scores of indignant users reportedly dropped the service.

Here’s what got people so riled in the new privacy policy update:

“[y]ou agree that a business or other entity may pay us to display your username, likeness, photos (along with any associated metadata), and/or actions you take, in connection with paid or sponsored content or promotions, without any compensation to you.”

That wording seemed to indicate that Instagram had the right to sell photos to third parties at will, and then pocket the money.

The reaction was swift and angry. Instagram quickly went into crisis mode and issued a clarification. Turns out it was all a big misunderstanding due to poor communication and Instagram does not plan to sell your photos after all. Instagram co-founder Kevin Systrom said the company is working on revised language to make it more clear what will happen with users’ photos.

According to a Chicago Tribune story, Mr. Systrom also stated, “language that indicated your photos could be used in advertisements will be removed from the terms completely.”

Instagram was smart to jump on this quickly, issue a clarification and also say it is listening to feedback, will fix mistakes and clear up the confusion. So, gold star for taking this seriously and saying the right things in a timely manner.

But I have to wonder about a couple of things that still bother me.

First, how could language like “you agree that a business or other entity may pay us to display your username, likeness, photos…” get out in the first place? There should have been red flags everywhere. Wasn’t there at least one person in authority at Instagram who saw that wording and thought, “Gee, I wonder if this might create a bit of controversy?”

Maybe there was someone who raised the issue, but senior management chose to ignore it. We may never know.

Which leads me to my second point: Instagram surely must know that most people don’t take the time to read all the details of policy updates. And that make me wonder if what was really happening here was that management was trying to slip this through and got caught.

Whether or not the wording was intentional, trust has been broken with many thousands of Instagramers, and it will take more than a policy clarification to restore it.

The best way to avoid problems like this is to identify and handle them before they ever get out of the barn.

Don Beehler provides public relations consulting services to advertising agencies and businesses.

photo credit: phauly via photopin cc

The Hidden Cost of Paid Website Content to Ad Agency PR

Dollars Bills Everywhere Image cmedium_61056391

Last week as I was monitoring coverage of a news release I distributed for a financial services client, I went to a business website that has been on my media list longer than I can remember.

And right toward the top, there was a headline based on the release with a hyperlink to the article. When I clicked on the link, much to my surprise I got a message saying:

“This content is exclusive to subscribers.”

My options were to subscribe for a minimum of a year or pay $7.50 to purchase the article. Content that used to be free now came at a price

I hate to sound cheap, but paying $7.50 to access a website article that probably was no more than a page or two when printed out seems a bit high to me. And I really wasn’t excited about subscribing to content that used to not cost me a thing.

But my real concern was that only subscribers could see a story which previously would have been available to anyone with Internet service.

How many business people subscribe to this site? I haven’t a clue. And of that number, how many would be interested in a financial services story and take the time to read it?

What I do know is that the potential audience for my client’s story had been significantly limited.

I understand that the website needs revenue to remain a going concern, but I really wonder if charging for access to articles is something that will come back to bite it.

If I were looking at a place to give a business exclusive for a client, I’d think twice about a news website that charges for access.

It’s true that most newspapers and magazines charge a subscription or individual copy fee, but somehow with online it seems different. A newspaper or magazine I can hold in my hands. (Yes, I’m familiar with Kindle, but in this case I was after an article, not a book.)

From what I’ve read, quite a few people are bulking at paying for website content.

As newspapers and magazines continue to struggle to survive, it will be interesting to see if paying for access to news websites—especially to sites that primarily cover local or regional business news like this one—will be a successful model.

One international survey found that nearly half the respondents would consider paying for online access to a magazine, and a little over 40% for online newspaper content—if they thought the content was worth the price.

That may sound like a good percentage, but as a PR person I’m thinking of the other 50-60% who won’t pay—and therefore will never see a client’s story.

That’s a hidden cost I’m not yet ready to pay.

Don Beehler provides public relations consulting services to advertising agencies and businesses

photo credit: Tracy O via photopin cc