Ketchum Employee Sets Off Tempest in a Tweetpot

FedEx Follower Tattles Over Out-of-Context Twitter Comment

Posted by Ken Wheaton on 01.16.09 @ 04:14 PM

Seems that all the Twitter and blog frenzy over a comment made by @keyinfluencer was a lot of sound and fury signifying nothing (except someone's oversensitivity and rush to take said comment out of context).

On Jan. 15, as many Twitter users were congratulating themselves on the awesome job they were doing of spreading the news of the crashed US Airways flight, a tweet popped up warning users to be careful what they say on Twitter. As a big fan of inappropriate behavior, I decided to investigate and found myself at Peter Shankman's blog. Shankman related the tale of Twitter user keyinfluencer, who had tweeted the following about Memphis: "True confession but I'm in one of those towns where I scratch my head and say 'I would die if I had to live here!'" The problem is that keyinfluencer is James Andrews, VP-director of Ketchum Interactive, who was in Memphis for a client meeting with FedEx. The other problem: A FedEx employee noticed the tweet, got worked up about it and, according to Shankman, e-mailed Andrews to voice his complaints, CC'ing a host of Ketchum and FedEx executives.

I, being a journalist and not a diplomatic agency sort, would have fired back a reply to all, stating that my tweets were my own business, that CC'ing the boss is a punk thing to do, that Memphis does indeed leave a lot to be desired and that I'd bet my salary that Memphis folks dis New York all the time. Then I would have added: "P.S. Memphis barbecue is a joke compared with Texas and Carolina barbecue." Finally, I'd fly down to Memphis and challenge said e-mailer to a street fight (assuming he or she was not bigger than me, of course).

Andrews didn't reply to a tweet for information, but subsequent posts explained he was talking about a miserable check-in experience at a hotel, one involving an "intolerant individual." (Be sure to read Andrews' follow-up at that link.)

Ketchum said in a statement: "It was a lapse in judgment, and we've apologized to our client. We greatly value this long-standing client relationship. It is our privilege to work with them." According to the company, Andrews still has his job. Which is only fair, in my mind.

The lesson, of course, is that if you work in a communications-related field and get paid to kiss up to clients for a living, you should be careful what you're posting on public forums. And, like it or not, Facebook, Twitter and other such tools have turned into public forums. And, as Andrews explained, the 140-character limit on Twitter doesn't always allow for context.

The other lesson is for Twitter readers. Keep in mind that the 140-character limit doesn't allow for context. Also, as mama always said, "No one likes a tattletale." It's one thing to beef with someone over civic pride. It's another to try to get a person fired by CC'ing superiors for an offense so minor.

5 Comments

  By nickkinports | Chicago, IL January 16, 2009 06:46:01 pm:

Considering how highly indexed Twitter is on Google and Twitter search I would never say anything that I would not say to someones face.

That's tough for Mr. Andrews, hopefully this won't go any further and he will still be employed in a month.

@ADMAVEN
http://admaven.blogspot.com

Permalink

  By dzeitman | Redwood City, CA January 16, 2009 07:01:50 pm:

While I appreciate the sentiment and your support for @keyinfluencer, the point of the incident is this – it's way too easy to piss off a client. And agencies have probably been fired for much less that 140 misguided characters. Don't give clients any more ammo...

Permalink

  By KenWheaton | New York, NY January 16, 2009 07:28:20 pm:

So you should all live your lives in fear of clients? After what was apparently a highly insulting encounter (likely involving race) at a hotel, he makes a comment that names neither client, nor city on Twitter. And then he's ratted out by an upset employee? Still sounds like a raw deal.

You're both right. A Twitter writer has a responsibility to consider context, etc. But Twitter readers have a responsibility as well -- to consider they might not know the whole story behind a 140-character comment and certainly not to forward said comment to all parties involved.

Permalink

  By dzeitman | Redwood City, CA January 16, 2009 07:51:37 pm:

Got it, Ken. Definitely a passive aggressive move by the employee. And yes, there's more to the story than indicated in the tweet. Hey, maybe there's even more to the FedEx/Ketchum story than we know. Guess they just need to hug it out...

Permalink

  By bbcarter | Myrtle Beach, SC January 27, 2009 12:02:48 pm:

It's tough to draw a line or create a rule for this.

But I'm intolerant of people who get offended easily. ;-)

Yes we have to be diplomatic- and living in public (on Twitter) means considering the consequences of your opinions, possibly changing your approach, learning to be more diplomatic, or if it fits your brand, being all-out-controversial...

Depends on the brand, but some people probably don't have the tact to be a company's public representative.

Still, in my opinion, over the next 20 years we'll get over this assumption that an employee always in all situations represents the company they work for. I think that's an outmoded assumption.

There's a big difference between someone like Lucia who represents Pandora on Twitter as a customer service person, and your average employee who happens to be on Twitter and people happen to know where they work- in the latter case, I don't think you can take everything that person says all the time as representative of the company.

We're still people. And a lot of people only work 8 hours a day. Their other 8 waking hours do not necessarily represent the company they work for.

Permalink