Twitter not for every athlete
There has been an increasing trend toward athletes, mostly professional and mostly NFLers, who have gotten into trouble with their postings on Twitter.
Let us say up front that Twitter is more a fascination with celebrities and the media that it is with the general public. It is also our clear belief that Facebook, with more than 10 times the members, is the bigger preference (and potential source for problems) among athletes on the college level with whom we conduct speaker training. Media members, particularly print, have gone to Twitter as a source to try to salvage reader interests; celebrities do it because their PR reps tell them to and they have an amazing amount of free time on their hands. Local TV anchors drone on about posts from followers to try to show they are contemporary and want to generate ratings. Syndicated Hollywood programs go on about famous people posts as if they were communiques from the White House.
Frankly, we don't care what Ashton Kutcher's views on domestic oil drilling are or whether Shaquille O'Neal likes jelly or syrup on his pancakes.
Of a more serious issue is the right of athletes to post controversial comments and belief in the short window Twitter allows. The NFL players who have posted views on everything from Bin Laden's death to the status of talks in the ongoing labor dispute have claimed they have the right under the First Amendment to post anything they want and shouldn't be criticized for it. They also all tend to post some ridiculous comments -- the media sweeps in and reports on them -- and then they usually backtrack in a subsequent tweet to tone down their original posts or use the dreaded "I was just kidding."
We always teach in our sessions that posting on social media should be viewed the same way as talking to a reporter. Your audience isn't just your fans -- Twitter preaches you can bypass the reporter and reach out directly to your base -- it is the media and your boss. Some athletes who take the Twitter route do so because they are just plain "chicken." They post things in private they wouldn't have the guts to say to a real reporter. Then they hide in the cloak of the First Amendment as a shield from criticism. There is no issue that free speech allows you to make a complete idiot of yourself at any time or any place.
But the plain facts are these: if you post something controversial you aren't just representing yourself you are representing your franchise.Being an athlete doesn't exclude you from this fact. If a player say from the Jacksonville Jaguars posts some knuckle head comment, the public will view it coming not just from that athlete but from the organization. We try to hammer this home in our professional and collegiate sports sessions -- mostly after inhouse people have told them the same thing and we re-enforce this critical message.
If an employee at IBM or Wendy's posts something stupid on their account, they face reprimands, discipline or even dismissal. That is the way it is in today's corporate culture. So it should be for athletes at a a university or pro team.
We aren't saying athletes shouldn't have beliefs; quite the contrary. Athletes should have a conscience, a soul and an opinion. But they should have to temper their public postings the way the rest of America does; if they feel so strongly on a subject they are willing to risk the scorn of the public and equally as important the wrath of management, fine. Just understand that Twitter, Facebook or the other emerging social media sites aren't private. Our advice is also think before you post, email or text. Remember once you hit send it's out in cyberspace forever.
Let us say up front that Twitter is more a fascination with celebrities and the media that it is with the general public. It is also our clear belief that Facebook, with more than 10 times the members, is the bigger preference (and potential source for problems) among athletes on the college level with whom we conduct speaker training. Media members, particularly print, have gone to Twitter as a source to try to salvage reader interests; celebrities do it because their PR reps tell them to and they have an amazing amount of free time on their hands. Local TV anchors drone on about posts from followers to try to show they are contemporary and want to generate ratings. Syndicated Hollywood programs go on about famous people posts as if they were communiques from the White House.
Frankly, we don't care what Ashton Kutcher's views on domestic oil drilling are or whether Shaquille O'Neal likes jelly or syrup on his pancakes.
Of a more serious issue is the right of athletes to post controversial comments and belief in the short window Twitter allows. The NFL players who have posted views on everything from Bin Laden's death to the status of talks in the ongoing labor dispute have claimed they have the right under the First Amendment to post anything they want and shouldn't be criticized for it. They also all tend to post some ridiculous comments -- the media sweeps in and reports on them -- and then they usually backtrack in a subsequent tweet to tone down their original posts or use the dreaded "I was just kidding."
We always teach in our sessions that posting on social media should be viewed the same way as talking to a reporter. Your audience isn't just your fans -- Twitter preaches you can bypass the reporter and reach out directly to your base -- it is the media and your boss. Some athletes who take the Twitter route do so because they are just plain "chicken." They post things in private they wouldn't have the guts to say to a real reporter. Then they hide in the cloak of the First Amendment as a shield from criticism. There is no issue that free speech allows you to make a complete idiot of yourself at any time or any place.
But the plain facts are these: if you post something controversial you aren't just representing yourself you are representing your franchise.Being an athlete doesn't exclude you from this fact. If a player say from the Jacksonville Jaguars posts some knuckle head comment, the public will view it coming not just from that athlete but from the organization. We try to hammer this home in our professional and collegiate sports sessions -- mostly after inhouse people have told them the same thing and we re-enforce this critical message.
If an employee at IBM or Wendy's posts something stupid on their account, they face reprimands, discipline or even dismissal. That is the way it is in today's corporate culture. So it should be for athletes at a a university or pro team.
We aren't saying athletes shouldn't have beliefs; quite the contrary. Athletes should have a conscience, a soul and an opinion. But they should have to temper their public postings the way the rest of America does; if they feel so strongly on a subject they are willing to risk the scorn of the public and equally as important the wrath of management, fine. Just understand that Twitter, Facebook or the other emerging social media sites aren't private. Our advice is also think before you post, email or text. Remember once you hit send it's out in cyberspace forever.
Posted by Randy Minkoff at 5/17/2011 7:19 AM 
Categories: Communications, Crisis management/Media Training, Crisis management, College sports, New Media Sports
Categories: Communications, Crisis management/Media Training, Crisis management, College sports, New Media Sports
Comments