I wrote last week that all organizations should get on Twitter-if only to protect their brand from impostors. Now, though, our debate is about how exactly companies should be twittering-and if there’s any value in a company posting tweets as itself.
Suppose we were to start twittering under PRinCanada. Posting under the name of the organization itself, the argument goes, defeats the purpose of social media. Messages from the faceless front of ABC Company is just one-way dialogue with no consumer interaction. In other words, it just perpetuates the traditional model of communication that consumers have come to so dislike.
Not the best image we want for the voice of public relations practitioners in Canada.
On the other hand, a company spokesperson-the higher up in the org chart, the better-twittering the company’s behalf gives it a face and allows two-way dialogue to take place.
If that’s the route a company takes, then there’s the question of who will take on the spokesperson role-if it’s a company VP itself or several individuals posting under one name.
To do that, it must be made clear on each tweet who is actually posting-or else a company’s trustworthiness comes into question.
Should companies tweet as a unified whole-or should it be left to individuals?[ad]