Australian politicians on twitter #facepalmingfortheelectorate

Examples of prominent figures embarrassing themselves on social media are everywhere.  So much so that some astute observer could compile a multi-volume text book on exactly what not to say on social media using thousands of examples from the past 5 years.

Particularly prone to embarrassing gaffes are Australian politicians.  So much so that their media advisers and public relations staff probably live in a constant state of anxiety, as it would seem that in spite of their best intentions, a foolish tweet by their minister is only ever moments away.

Twitter gaffes were back in the media following another gem from enthusiastic tweeter, Federal MP Steve Gibbons.  Earlier this week he tweeted: “Libs are led by a gutless douchebag and a narcissistic bimbo who aren’t fit to be MPs let alone PM and Deputy. Both should be sacked.”

Obviously this zinger sounded hilariously incisive in his mind, but in his haste to share his witty condemnation of his political opponents, he failed to consider the fact that his party had recently bombarded the opposition leader with claims of misogyny and sexism.   He promptly apologised and wiped the egg off his face.

What’s more, some politicians don’t even understand common terminology.  For example, ACT’s long suffering opposition leader Zed Seselja furiously reacted when an ACT Labor MP called one of his staffers a twitter “troll”.  Believing that his staffer had been referred to a mythical, cave-dwelling giant or dwarf, Zed labelled this claim as “gutter politics of the very worst kind” and “cowardly personal attack”.  #Oops.

So long as Australian politicians tweet, rest assured there will be bad jokes, strong opinion, and maybe even the occasional coherent policy update.

In the meantime, keep up to date with Australia’s own “politwoops”, a website which records the deleted tweets of politicians.  Examples range from poor taste to incomprehensible gibberish.

What’s your favourite?

// Alec Schumann

Shell’s arctic campaign: snowball fighting with trolls

Shell recently had the well-meaning idea of asking the general internet population to create their next ad about arctic fuel sources.  Posting a meme template with images of the arctic, anyone can enter in ad copy and it is published on Shell’s website http://arcticready.com/social/gallery.

Power on: Let’s melt some ice

On the surface it seems like a good idea.  Allowing customers to have a say in ad copy, in theory will encourage them to engage with the campaign, share it with their friends and feel a stronger sense of ownership in the campaign.  It also allows Shell to crowd source ideas for the campaign and get some constructive ideas about what consumers think about their brand.

Theory does not always predict action, particularly when it comes to online consumers.

Despite Shell’s best intentions, this campaign failed miserably. 

Their official campaign site was attacked by consumers who subverted the campaign message by posting ad copy rich with sarcasm and black humour.

Shell was either not prepared for or did not anticipate this possibility.  What should have been a democratic campaign, quickly turned into a running joke which went viral (even making it onto popular online humour site 9GAG).

Shell: Social Media Fail?

By running this campaign, Shell has likely done more damage to their brand among the general internet population.

In the short term it is an embarrassing social media gaff, but in the long term it may do lasting damage to their brand image as these consumer created, anti-brand images will likely remain on the internet for a long time.

As Shell’s campaign demonstrates, involving consumers in designing your ad campaign is not always a good idea.  It is also a reminder that online consumers can be funny, cruel and subversive in a short meme.

//Alec Schumann