My friend John Haydon posted an interesting status update on his Facebook profile. Short and simple, it said: “Dear Facebook user. Please don’t tag me in a photo or video unless I’m actually in the photo or video. Thanks.”
And it stopped and made me think – are we now offering permission spamming for friends on social networks?
The minute we sign up for a service like Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, etc, we offer our details so we can find our existing friends or online connections, and hook up with them on our new network too.
The service we sign up for assures us that our details are safe and they won’t use or give them to third-party marketing and advertising services.
Yet it doesn’t really include that same option for friends.
That then leads to a whole slew of tags or similar on Facebook (just as John mentions) that have nothing to do with us, apart from our connection to that person.
Or there’s the Direct Message on Twitter where latest blog posts are pimped, or services shilled (though to be honest, I’m pretty fortunate in the connections I have on Twitter that they only DM me great stuff that I’d want to know about anyway).
The same goes for LinkedIn, where bulk and copy/paste messages are sent out promoting a service or product that, more often than not, holds no real interest for the person it’s been sent to. There’s also video responses on YouTube and even spam coming through on the likes of Skype and BlackBerry Messenger.
Of course, a lot can be put down to the networks not making it clear to the user that just by using a certain service, friends can be spammed (or the equivalent of unwanted messages).
Take the Facebook Like option, for example. If you like my Facebook Page, then (from what I’ve been reading) any updates on my page could appear on your wall, unless you (or I) have amended our settings so that doesn’t happen.
Now, I don’t want to spam you just as much as you don’t want to be spammed, and it’s certainly not deliberate. But Facebook makes this almost mandatory, which then pisses you off and makes my page offer less value, when I want it to be the complete opposite.
And therein lies the problem with all this new “social” approach, whether it’s networking or media. To be social, we have to open up certain doors.
But what happens when these doors turn our friends into spammers? And how do we differentiate the unwanted spam from the unaware spam? Thoughts?
photo credit: Adam UXB Smith
Enjoy this post? You might also like:
- Ten for 10 in 2010 – Blog Marketing
- Procrastination Is For Squares
- Ten for 10 in 2010 – Favourite Blog Posts
More from across the web:
- 3 Ways Facebook is Killing Your Website (Convince & Convert)
Strangers know less about you, so it is harder for them to deliver relevant information to you. The ‘good’ strangers are making an effort to provide useful social content to you.
Sometimes, strangers can be so good at this that they are more engaging than your friends.
For all the ‘friends’ out there, I would like to add to John’s message: Know that my attention to you is competing with my attention to strangers… More so than ever. When you are engaging with me, keep ME in mind. Luv ya
Haris Krijestorac´s most recent blog post …You Have 0 Friends
That’s a good point, Haris. Do you think we, then, need to be more “socially exact” as to our likes and dislikes, so it makes it easier for all connections to be as helpful or engaging as the “good ones”?
And great closing line, too
Yep – if I am in the same network of friends as someone, chances are expressing my likes and dislikes is relevant to them. We know that people DO tend to follow their friends’ suggestions rather than listen passively to one-way advertising.
At the same time, PUSHING our likes and dislikes onto others makes us just as bad as the one-way advertisers, IF NOT WORSE! If I am tagged in a video I’m not in, the likes/dislikes expressed therein represent MY likes/dislikes. This is what John, I, and other people on the social web do not want.
Haris Krijestorac´s most recent blog post …You Have 0 Friends
Danny, I think precision and social exactness is needed today as it was in the past. I think it is easy to cross the line of liking something just because a friend wrote it. Even though we all are capable of posting valuable content, we also (and everyone is) capable of mediocrity or downright crap once in a while. I have made it a practice of discerning what I promote on the web. I am even more careful today with the impacts in can have with say the like button. (the whole tagging thing is baffling to me)
John´s most recent blog post …Two years since: looking back on my Twitter anniversary
Agreed, John, and I think we’re seeing more of that “sensible” approach online, especially as privacy issues become so widespread and discussed.
I remember the early days of Twitter, when certain folks would have anything they said retweeted just because of their standing on the service. While the majority was excellent and worth sharing, some crud would also filter through.
Now, we are becoming more discerning and choosy in what we share. Yet there’s still the issue of unaware sharing, and I think we (or the services involved) need to fix that too. Before we all get pissed off with each other
I found out about this post from Chris Brogan and I LOVE LOVE LOVE it!
Yes, to be social involves opening certain doors but people are abusing that “open door” more and more. I get tagged in some many irrelevant things because someone wants me to pay attention and get invited to things that clearly have nothing to do with me, offer no value or are local events in other cities.
In fact, I’ve gone beyond “hiding” people on Facebook; I am actively unfriending people who abuse this open-door policy.
How do I address this unwanted spam versus unaware spam? I let people know that while I appreciate them including me in things, that some things are irrelevant and spamming practices. Depending on how they handle it, I soon make a decision on whether they get hid from spammy updates or unfriended for unwanted spam…
Excellent post. I will be sharing this with my network as a valuable learning tool.
Taryn Pisaneschi (@TarynP)´s most recent blog post …SXSW Conference Tips (with a side of #bacon)
Hey there Taryn,
He’s a good ‘un, is Chris.
One of the things on Facebook that makes me smile (wryly), and something you mention, is relevance.
I keep getting invites to events in Israel. Or Paris. Or Sydney. Great – would love to come, but geographically, could be a bit of a push…
There are a ton of filters in place that can help you target who and where a message goes. Being relevant in the first place sure helps; being geographically relevant a whole lot more.
Thanks for dropping by and sharing your thoughts
Twitter: ariherzog
That’s interesting. People tweet about blog posts but don’t add comments? That’s not spam, how?
The sarcasm level here is high.
Ari Herzog´s most recent blog post …Follow, Shmollow: Use Twitter Your Own Way
Twitter: johnhaydon
Danny – A lot of this comes down to setting expectations. Obviously, some people assume that it’s ok to tag people in photos and videos, even if they’re not there. Yeah, you’d assume they should know better, but who am I to judge.
My only responsibility is to expectations, like I did with status update.
Goes to show that there’s a big difference between knowing the media, and knowing the social.
John Haydon´s most recent blog post …Start Blogging Today – An new online classroom for growing nonprofits and small businesses
Would it be the same offline, John, or do you think it’s primarily the fact that we encourage folks to be open as part of “doing” social media?
Twitter: johnhaydon
I think it would be different offline. You have infinite social cues that you don’t have online (body language, facial expressions). The social norms offline are picked up very quickly and very naturally.
How often do you not comment back to someone who irked you by how they’ve shared?
John Haydon´s most recent blog post …Start Blogging Today – An new online classroom for growing nonprofits and small businesses
So, have baseball bat will travel, then?
Oh, I’ve let tons of comments go unanswered. Then again, if I feel the need they have to be answered, I’m in big style.
Thanks for the post Danny. This is news to me and good information to know. I’ll have to take a closer look at that Facebook Like feature. As a young PR pro, it seems rather silly (not to mention unethical) that people would incorrectly tag someone in a post just to get their attention.
Especially if the originating tag could end up being tied into someone that’s, say, racist, homophobic, bigoted, etc.
There’s fun with friends and then there’s the other level.
Twitter: dannyintampa
That’s the tough thing with Facebook, you can’t control what others do but there are options in place to have tags removed but if it becomes persistent with friends it can become annoying real quick.
Danny Nappi´s most recent blog post …Tavernier Florida Keys 107
It seems that Facebook are more concerned about numbers than what the numbers are doing.
Yep, very annoying.
It’s weird how we have to consider how responsible our friends might or might not be with our with our data. The Facebook fiasco reminds us that we can’t just blindly post our every move anymore.