So, the worldwide web is twenty today! The internet is a good few years older, but it was on 6th August 1991 that the first openly accessible website was published.
Twenty years on, it’s an amazing information and communication tool. Chances are I wouldn’t be talking to you without it; but like every major development in the way we humans interact, it has its pitfalls – things the owner of the original website could never have dreamed of!
We’re all aware of identity theft – but what about identity shifting? What do I mean? Well, I’m talking abut the fact that any one of us can hide behind the apparent anonymity of the web and project an online persona which might have very little to do with who we really are. That’s not all bad, of course. It lets very small businesses compete with much larger ones and very big businesses make themselves appear smaller and more approachable; but it also opens the door for misrepresentation – sometimes accidental, sometimes not.
Before I say another word, I have to put my cards on the table: everything I do is about connecting individuals through the spoken word, with a view to them building personal relationships – which are so central to twenty-first century business. So I’m biased – but that doesn’t mean my misgivings – and those of plenty of others I come across – don’t have value. In fact, if they’re acknowledged, they represent an opportunity for those involved in using the web for written communication. If that’s you and you acknowledge what worried me, take it on board and address it in practical terms, we’re well on the way to working together – and I’d certainly recommend you to anyone else who shares my concerns.
One founding stone of any relationship is trust. That’s hard enough to build when we can’t see or hear somebody, but it can be done, over time. For me, it can be undone pretty damned quickly if, after an exchange through social media or email, I find out that I wasn’t actually talking to who I thought I was talking to – that someone else was reading my words and responding in their name.
I’m talking here about emails and social media accounts in personal names, not under a purely business identity. Me being me, I’m always curious about who handles a company’s Twitter or Face Book account, or who actually answers the ‘info@’ emails, but that is just because of what I do and the way I am. On a practical level, it really doesn’t bother me as long as I get the information I’m after. That said, I do interact differently with a general email address or a Twitter feed in a company name; I’m much less likely to get into conversation unless I can get a feel for who I’m actually talking to. I’m not saying that never happens – just that I find it harder -and if I’m not getting into conversation, I’m less likely to build up the kind of rapport that makes me want to progress the connection. For instance, I’m never quite sure how to open an email to an ‘info@’ and I’ve never replied to one particular company Twitter feed – even though I work very closely with the company concerned and may well know the person at the keyboard. At the moment, I don’t know who that is, so the most I’ll do is retweet their posts.
When I email or tweet someone in their own name, though, it’s different. I just find that more approachable. while I’ve been writing this I’ve had a mini-chat with a complete stranger (who, as far as I can tell, tweets in his own name), about getting up too early on a Saturday. Some of those little exchanges have led to phone-calls – which have led to work. I feel more comfortable, being able to visualise someone, however vague and general the visualisation may be. It can be enough to start building trust – unless or until I discover I’ve had the virtual wool pulled over my eyes!
I completely understand the practical reasons for engaging someone else to handle their social media accounts, and even emails, on their behalf. Sheer time pressure is the biggest; but I’ve seen the decision to delegate come back and bite people.
One contact delegated their emails to a new PA – who promptly took it upon herself to make executive decisions about what the boss should and shouldn’t be made aware of – which caused said boss all sorts of commercial and personal hassle! Another example, a client of mine back in my lawyering days, ran into problems when she delegated her emails. No-one was made aware of the change, so one contact, who used the address for personal as well as business exchanges, went on blithely sending my client messages including some private information that neither the sender nor the recipient would have wanted to share with anyone else. The PA, of course, read this – and didn’t keep it confidential. The result was very messy, legally and personally.
More recently, a friend of mine started tweeting a lot more regularly than usual. He was putting out some good stuff, so I started retweeting it. In an email a couple of days later, he said, ‘Thanks for the RTs – but you’re tweeting stuff I know nothing about! My marketing people must be earning their money!’ I did have to smile at that – but more seriously, I hoped he didn’t have the embarrassment of running into someone else who might use one of the articles which had been tweeted in his name as a conversation opener… an article the supposed tweeter had never even read… Eggy features all round…
For me, the discomfort is about all these practical risks as much as my personal belief that nothing beats a genuine human connection.
I recently spoke about this to a social media expert. ‘But if it’s managed properly,’ she said, ‘you’d never know.’ ‘But that’s worse in a way!’ I said. ‘That means I could go on talking to one person thinking they’re someone else – thinking I’m getting to know someone when they’re actually a proxy – and what happens if I end up talking to the named person for real? I’m suddenly going to twig that we don’t know each other at all!’ She explained that if she manages clients’ accounts for them, she’s careful to make sure that anything specific goes back to the client for them to deal with personally; but she’s a conscientious professional applying best practice. Other web-based cock-ups tell us that not everyone follows best practice!
Ok, so as an ex-lawyer and current radio and podcast presenter and trainer, ghosts unnerve me – communication ghosts that is: ghost bloggers, emailers, tweeters and Facebookers all make me uncomfortable; but I can see it makes business sense sometimes. Commerce is all about compromise – between quality and cost, time and hands-on control etc. All I would say, as I say to my own clients about creating audio for their business (no, I never present in anyone else’s name – I’m no impressionist!) – delegate, but whatever you do, don’t abdicate responsibility; and choose your ghost with care. It has to be someone you trust not to abuse the position you’re putting them in; to know the boundaries. Your personal and commercial credibility is on the line. Finally, if you can possibly avoid it, don’t let them communicate in your own name. Anyone with the right credentials can represent your business, but only you can really represent yourself.
What do you think? Can you see my point – or do you think I’m over-reacting? I’d love to know – as long as you are who you say you are…