other content to their Twitter accounts or their Facebook Page. So, it’s much more mainstream in 2010 than it was even a few years ago, where that kind of content was seen as unofficial, off-the-record musings. Candidates must real- ize that Twitter is an open mic. Someone is always watch- ing. At the same time, I think candidates can still view these applications as an opportunity to round out a voter’s im- pression of them. As such, they should resist making per- sonal comments/remarks/observations off limits - it can really be a great outreach tool that shows another side of your candidate. But these musings - however informal - are never off-the-record, so they should not muse about some- thing they wouldn’t be comfortable saying to a reporter.
GOLDSBIE: I wish television debates were as snarky as Twitter. Then you might see some honesty peek through. But yes. Passive-aggression is a lot more amusing and a lot less unpleasant when it comes in 140-character bursts. Also, social media is ideal for calling b.s. on your opponents by linking to things that disprove their claims or expose them as hypocrites.
C&E: Would it be advisable for politicians to manage their own so- cial media accounts or is it fine for them to hand this off to their staff / campaigners?
BARANSKI: As long as a candidate trusts his or her inner circle to speak on their behalf, I see no harm in delegating responsibility. Social media channels are simply that - yet another way for candidates and their campaigns to get a message out. But the giant caution I have for any candidate - if you’re not doing it yourself, you better trust those who are on your behalf 100%.
BELL: It depends on their particular comfort level. I’ve worked with candidates who update their own accounts as well as those who will never come within 10 feet of a keyboard. The key is to be authentic. If you (as a candidate) or your candidate aren’t comfortable with tweeting, blog- ging, etc don’t do it - have your team take on that task. If a candidate does tweet or update their account on their own, they should refer to question two. The one piece of advice I would add is to maintain a consistent identity on the ac- count - shifting from your team to you on one account can be a little confusing to outside observers. It’s about establishing a level of trust. Am I talking to the candidate? Their staff? Its important voters know exactly who they are following and/or interacting with.
GOLDSBIE: It tends to be more entertaining and more in- sightful when a politician does it him or her self, but in elections it doesn’t really matter, as long as it’s made clear who’s behind the account. When sitting in government, however, it should totally be the elected person — oth- erwise, it’s just a time-consuming extension of an email newsletter.
C&E: There’s a growing tendency amongst media outlets to print tweets and Facebook comments as sources in articles. How do you feel about this? Is it accurate to quote someone’s 140 charac- ter statement as opposed to their press release?
BARANSKI: Absolutely. 100%. Social media is the new, albeit condensed, CanadaNewsWire.
BELL: As long as the media outlet is pulling from official accounts and not fans, supporters or affiliates. As I men- tioned, many campaigns publish official releases or state- ments via social media networks. If it has been designated an “official” account and they are actually able to boil a release down to 140 characters, then yeah - quote away. But I’m more weary of using a quote of a supporter para- phrasing the announcement, etc. There are typically des- ignated spokespeople or even the candidate themselves. If they quote those official accounts, I see no problem with doing so.
GOLDSBIE: A message put on Twitter is essentially a public statement, but unless the tweet is in itself interesting, quot- ing a press release is still probably preferable (for the simple fact that its sentence structure will necessarily be superior). Because of the layers of privacy expectations, Facebook is trickier. Some public figures use their Facebook profile as an outreach tool, while others are on there for the usual personal reasons that anyone joins. Wall posts made by the former are fair game, whereas discretion should be used with the latter.
Stefan Baranski is the Principal of Bespoke PR Limited (
http://bespokePR.ca), a Toronto-based communications consul- tancy. He currently serves as Toronto mayoral candidate George Smitherman’s campaign spokesperson and has previously worked for Ontario PC Leaders Tim Hudak, Bob Runciman, John Tory and Ernie Eves. Follow him at @sbaranski Brett Bell is a long-time political operative specializing in on-
line campaigning and social media advocacy. He is the Principal of Grassroots Online (
http://www.grassrootsonline.ca) and the so- cial media columnist for this publication. He has served as the Di- rector or Social Media for a provincial campaign and often speaks to political organizations, non-profits and private sector companies on social media campaign strategies. Follow him at @heybrettbell Jonathan Goldsbie is an activist and journalist whose work
has been featured in EYE Weekly, Torontoist and the National Post. He currently writes a political panel about the Toronto may- oral election for the National Post (which, as a point of disclosure, is co-written with this article’s author). He is a frequent guest on radio and television. Follow him at @goldsbie. C&E’s guest interviewer, Anthony Furey, writes commentary
every Monday in the National Post and is regularly featured on talk radio. Ask him about his communications services at antho-
ny@penneyenterprises.com Follow him at @anthonyfurey.
June 2010 | Campaigns & Elections 43
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80