Recently, a client engaged down the path of creating an online promotion with a requirement that entrants upload a written essay, 1-3 photos and an optional video. These creative elements as per other promotions would be uploaded to the web site, and eventually published for all to see, for all to share, and for all to vote on to select a winner.
So the question came up, what happens if someone submits something that is considered adverse to the brand? This seems like a simple question to answer, just prevent the entry from being published. Or is it that simple? And then, do you allow all postings to be published instantly or vet them through an approval process before giving them public display.
First of all, how does a brand actually identify all the potential scenarios that could surface? Even more difficult, how does a brand decide what is “acceptable”? Take these scenarios;
1. A promotion sponsored by a soft drink manufacturer has a picture submitted where the entrant happens to be wearing a watch that has a competitive brand logo on it
2. A financial institution sponsors a promotion that has a picture uploaded to it with the entrant on a street corner and in the distance, a competitive branch
3. A video entry comes in to a contest sponsored by an airline where the entrant inadvertently discusses their fear of flying without directly mentioning an airline nor scary event like a crash
There are arguments to be made for both sides of the discussion to publish or not. Allow the entrants to be posted publically because they really are innocent or indirectly adverse to the brand. Rather than directly putting down the sponsor, they give visibility to competitors or talk negatively about the service in general. On the other hand, prevent them from being published because competitors will get face time or other entrants might be turned off of entering themselves.
Regardless of the decision, in an era of social networks, blogs and email the choice can have serious implications. Should the picture showing the watch with the competitive brand be published, assume it will eventually find its way on some picture site like http://www.popular-pics.com. The video of the scared passenger will probably make it way to http://www.youtube.com.
What if they are rejected before even getting to the published state? How does the potential entrant to the contest react? You see, they have access to the same distribution tools that the published content usually finds its way to. This time however, it might not be distributed with light hearted comments. Rather, imagine a recently rejected contest participant slamming a brand because they shot a picture on their street with a competitive brand “accidentally” in the background. Could the implications of this negative message be worse than having posted it in the first place? How many people would have noticed let alone cared about the brand in the background versus the actual intent of the picture.
My personal opinion is to assume that most people entering a promotion online are doing it for the right reasons. If someone wanted to do damage to a brand, they wouldn’t need a contest to find ways to do it. From detrimental Facebook groups to websites and blogs dedicated to the “anti-brand” (think http://www.ihaterogers.ca/) there are ample methods at the disposal of those who intend to do damage. The risk of disallowing someone who meant no harm and the after effects of what they could do might outweigh the benefits of allowing those who meant no harm access to publish instantly and spread the message of the contest.
That instant versus delayed debate is a whole other discussion, but ask yourselves one simple question. Is it easier to get someone who just went through the process of uploading photos to click the share button now, or wait for hours or days to receive an email telling them that they can now engage in spreading your brand message? I am open to have my opinion changed.
No related posts.
Articles of Interest