I Bet You Think This Song Is About You...
Sunday, November 11, 2012 This week, Procter & Gamble invited a group of mom bloggers to Toronto as part of their blogger ambassador program. The purpose of the invitation was specifically (via Playground Confidential):
As a P&Gmom, you’re part of our family. Throughout the year, you’ll be involved in unique programs, be first to try new products and have access to our experts. Our hope is that by providing these opportunities, you’ll share your experience with your readers.
That they did. In fact, they tweeted so much with the #pgmom hash tag that it was trending in Canada. A few of us, who have serious concerns about the toxins in P&G products, tweeted some of our concerns, questions, and information on independent testing that has been done on P&G products (you can see some samples of my tweets in Rebecca's post).
The reaction from the P&G moms ranged from:
- Calling us jerks and mean girls and bullies
- Telling us to screw off
- Saying it was just sour grapes because we weren't invited
- Saying that we think we're better moms
- Calling us self-righteous
- Saying we don't understand their motivations or reasons for attending the event
- Saying that we probably didn't care about or notice them at all until they were attending the event
- Telling us to get our own hash tag
P&G has a vested interest in getting a positive message out about its brands, and it is using moms as its mouthpiece. Those of us who have concerns about P&G have an interest in informing the public about those concerns and putting pressure on the company to change its practices.
If P&G were using its own social media accounts to put hundreds and hundreds of positive tweets out about its products, I would direct my concerns to the company. When the company starts using moms as its mouthpiece, asking them to spread positive messages about the company, I will express my concerns to them.
It isn't personal.
...or at least it wasn't until we were called names.
I have no interest in judging another mom for the cleaning products she brings into her home, nor do I have any interest in being judged for the ones that I choose. I do, however, have an interest in ensuring that all of the products that we all have access to are as safe as possible. Cancer sucks and the destruction of our environment is horrible and can't be turned back. Pink ribbons and turning off our lights for an hour on Earth Day isn't going to fix the problem. Holding large multinational corporations that are responsible for poisoning our bodies and our earth accountable can fix the problem.
As Carly Stasko said in her guest post here on Mompaganda:
The mothers featured in these ads are not the problem. They are just parents themselves, and most certainly they’re doing what they think is best for their families. Perhaps they are. But Shell uses those mothers as the face of their public image, appropriating all that is positive in motherhood for their own cynical objectives, and that’s where the problem arises.
Accepting a title of ambassador and then sharing the company's message on twitter is an official role, paid or not. If the Canadian ambassador in a foreign country started sharing information publicly about Canada's issues or even if he/she just accepts the title, then people in that country should be able to go to the Canadian ambassador with questions and concerns about Canada's policies and actions and expect a reasonable response. Calling the people with questions or concerns jerks or bullies or brushing off their concerns as background noise or spam is inappropriate, unprofessional and undiplomatic.
When people ask questions about the ethics or tactics of organizations I work with, I get them answers. I don't call them names, I don't whine about how they are being unfair to me or how they don't understand my reasons for working with the organization. Even if the people asking me questions have a rude tone, I feel it is my role as an ambassador to rise above and provide a respectful reply.
Being an ambassador is work. Being an ambassador for a company that has a poor record on environmental and health issues is a lot of work and a big headache. That's why people who work in public relations in the tobacco industry and the oil industry make so much money. That's why moms who choose to be an ambassador for a company like P&G should demand more than just free product and a trip to Toronto in return. Because it isn't always going to be an easy ride.
If you truly support what Procter & Gamble is doing and are a fan of their products, that's none of my business. But if you are going to be a spokesperson for them, you need to ask yourself whether you are willing to take on the role of ambassador with all of the responsibilities and difficult questions that come with it. If you are, you need to ask whether you are willing to do that in return for free products and a few nights in a hotel or whether you need to be paid more in order to put up with that.
This isn't it about you. It isn't about what products you use, whether you're a good mom, or whether you're a good blogger. It is about P&G. If your relationship with them is so close or if you're so passionate about their products that you take a criticism of the company personally, then maybe it becomes about you because you've suddenly made yourself part of the problem instead of part of the solution. However, if you take your role as an ambassador seriously and professionally, you should be thanking people for asking questions, find a way to relay those concerns to the company and get back to people with answers. That is what an ambassador does.
Reader Comments (54)
As always, a thoughtful, thought-provoking post. I was actually quite shocked that the name-calling began - we have seen many heated discussions on twitter and blogs, but regardless of what 'side' you are on, I had never seen a discussion so perfectly shut down with one blog post. How does 'Screw you, jerks' get 50+ high fives from the very people that claim to be misunderstood and 'bullied?' Behaviour like that has nothing to do with what brands you use or align yourself with.
I just think that if you are going to embrace a company and celebrate it, then you also need to realize there are responsibilities that go along with that action. Do not take it personally. I know many people who were sporting the #pgmom hashtag this week. I do not think less of them for doing this, they have their reasons. But then when they respond defensively and reactively when people like me question some of the products or aims of companies like P&G, it changes the game. I have my own reasons for questioning many of these products and I have every right to do it publicly on twitter just like they have the right to wear that hashtag. And if I am going to get personal? I think people really need to think through what and who they share their names with when promoting products. It is not a party, girls, it is marketing. Look beyond the giddy to what you are representing. And I say girls with a twinkle in my eye;)...because I am still waiting for the #pgdad party.
This is exactly why I detest the "mommy blogger" moniker with all the give-aways, etc. It just feels false and artificial and entirely without substance. If you have to give people stuff to get them to read your content then what are you really giving them and why? Asking questions is not the problem here. Good job raising the conversation and thoughtfulness bars.
Annie, it's been good to be on team jerk with you. Nodding away. (Will link to your post in mine, later, too)
Fantastic, fantastic post. So clear. Many, many thanks.
I read through the #PGMom tweets yesterday and honestly I didn't find anything that you wrote to be outrageous. Maybe I just assume that everyone is concerned about toxic household products and this was a peak outside the eco-friendly bubble that I hide in. I was truly surprised at how upset people were about the "highjacked" hashtag. Reading through some blogs posts about it afterwards, I saw people that I follow on Twitter that were furious. I lost a bit of respect for some of them - not for attending the event, but for their responses to this situation. :(
I take some pleasure in the notion that P&G thought it could get PR on the cheap.
Here, here. If you agree to help promote a huge corporation, you open yourself up to criticism. It's part of the job. Do your research before you agree to anything, bloggers.
As much as PG might not like your criticism, I can't imagine that they would be too thrilled with the behavior of their ambassadors, either.
You would think so. But P&G actually re-tweeted the tweet where we were called jerks, which was linking to the post full of other accusations.
This is an excellent post and it needed to be said. Thank you for being a strong and ethical voice in the social media realm, Annie.
Well said.
P&G retweeted someone calling you jerks? Wow.
Double wow. Stay classy, P&G.
I have to admit that I wasn't surprised by the post, but I was surprised by many of the comments on it.
Me too, Tamara. It was disappointing.
I think the scramble for the moral high ground is always a bit messy. I don't think calling you folks jerks was very mature but the post was fair enough.....emotional response.
Same as the passive aggressive chatter that went on from the other side over and over till it all wound down.
It all seems to wind down to who is more popular rather than facts and figures doesn't it.
I found it very interesting to attend the event....I was interested in how other bloggers handle such a thing as I was on how P&G handled it.
Like any other publicity press junkets for any genre....some people get more excited by shiny than others. Some are happy to accept all that is there, others are not. The majority of the women there enjoyed the attention but were very honest in their opinions about the products and what they use and what they don't and why.
These were not stupid women. Perhaps you suggesting you 'educate' them put their backs up....Some people like to find things out on their own. Perhaps suggesting things to them on the p&g hashtag was not the smartest thing to do no matter your feelings on the twitter chatter and regardless of twitter being a free platform...perhaps seething on your own site first would have been a better choice..just my humble opinion.
But what would I know.....since I have obviously bought into the shiny by being there.
People need to also remember that attending events and receiving products is not a contract. Nothing is signed...nothing is agreed upon. I said yes because I use their products.
But GASP I also understand concerns about toxicity and danger....
hard to believe
People saying "get your own hashtag" don't understand how social media works. It's SOCIAL. That doesn't mean play time for you and your friends, it means play time for EVERYONE.
Kerry:
I don't think it has anything to do with who is more popular. I've done the same thing with plenty of other companies in instances where people vastly more popular and vastly less popular than me have been involved.
I don't understand the objection to using the hash tag. That is where the P&G Moms were spreading the positive messages about P&G, so that is where it seemed to make sense to express concerns and ask questions.
In terms of starting out by expressing the concerns on my site first (I wouldn't call it "seething"), I've tried that before too and it didn't really make a difference in terms of the reaction. Exhibit A: http://www.phdinparenting.com/2009/09/29/an-open-letter-to-the-attendees-of-the-nestle-family-blogger-event/" rel="nofollow">An Open Letter to the Attendees of the Nestle Family Blogger Event.
If everyone had just gone to the P&G mom event to learn, to share their opinions with the company, and to check out the products, none of this would have happened. It was because they decided to hop onto twitter and spread positive messages on behalf of the company that some of us felt the need to step in and counteract it.
Contract or not, people were providing free marketing for P&G and I wasn't willing to just let that stand given my concerns with the company (again, my concerns with the company, not with the bloggers).
Do you have a list of the P&G products? Or a link to that list?
I'm 100% behind you and the time you dedicate helping to represent another perspective. I am also sorry you had to take the brunt of the negativity (shame on P&G). Unfortunately the lure of a $2 bottle of cleaner is enough to keep people hashtagging the night away. Thank you for this article, just ONE MORE REASON to keep them on my toxic list, not only for the products they produce, but for their lack of ethics.
I've been watching all of this unfold with interest; even though I don't blog for pay or ambassadorships or anything outside of my own interests. I probably should not have said as much as I did, seeing that my experience is based on what I see online, not what I've done myself. If I offended anyone, I truly apologize.
I think there are a lot of issues mixed up in this: how bloggers are compensated for their time and effort, the ethics of the company itself, and how people were treated while these issues were discussed. Those are all massive issues on their own, so throw them together and there's a disaster waiting to happen.
There's been some really thoughtful stuff posted here so I won't repeat it. I think there is still a lot of Wild West in blogging-as-business. Stuff like this is the shootout.
What Jodine said. Well put.
I especially agree with the idea that you need be ok with standing behind what you choose to support, be a simple retweet for "free" or posts you make because you've signed on to represent a brand. One of the great benefits of social media is a new level of transparency *and* accountability.
[...] just so you know, Annie wasn’t the only person with “interesting” tweets: So you align yourself w a big [...]
There is a list here: http://www.pg.com/en_CA/brands/all-brands.shtml
Well said Annie...if your going to support any company you need to put your BIG GIRL PANTIES on and know what your getting into. There is always someone who won't like what your doing or who your doing it for...
This is why whenever you take something on you Have to "Own IT" and believe in it...
Cheers
One of the things about Twitter is its speed. There's a tendency to tweet first and think later. Emotion can come before reason. I have a lot of respect for your voice and your willingness to speak out, Annie, but I know I've gotten prickly about issues from Nutella to McDonald's. My back has gone up a bit in the past because I didn't really understand and appreciate where you were coming from. I do now. Hopefully, some of those name callers will come here and do some reading.
There's a real challenge, particularly on Twitter, to debate and discuss and disagree without causing offence because it's harder for people to recognize intent. Something can feel like a personal attack when it's not. (There's no body language, facial expression or voice inflection to provide additional information.)
I think that's why people get out of sorts so often.
It is hard, Pam. I appreciate your candour.
I feel it is incredibly important to question the practices, tactics, and motives of multinational corporations and governments. Not just the ones that we can't stand or boycott for whatever reason, but even (and especially) the ones we do allow into our homes. The only company I boycott outright is Nestle (well, purposely anyway -- there may be others that I "boycott" just because I have no need for what they sell). So when people see me questioning companies about their business practices, it usually isn't because I think I'm better than people who use those products. It is because I want those products to be better for me, my family, and my community.
We have Nutella in our cupboard at home. Do I think it is a healthy breakfast food? No. Do I think it is inappropriate for them to market it that way? Yes. Will I share http://www.care2.com/causes/is-cheap-chocolate-frosting-healthier-than-nutella.html" rel="nofollow">information on how it is actually less healthy than No Name Chocolate Frosting? Sure. Does that mean I'm judging people who buy it? No.
I get riled up when companies invite dozens of moms, dads or other consumers to events and then have them tweeting all the "AMAZING" things about the products when I know there is another side people should be aware of. If I sometimes come across as rude or abrupt it is because I have a really hard time understanding why it is socially acceptable to share information that may influence someone to purchase a product that could harm them, but it is not socially acceptable to share information on the potential harm of those products.
I've worked for a large Canadian brand as an ambassador (not blogging related).
They compensated me well.
They educated me on the company and its products.
They provided media training including specific training on how to deal with negative comments about the company/brand.
Is P&G doing any of this? Doesn't look like it.
Ditto previous commenter: sad how much bloggers are will to do for free cleaning products.
I too have gotten "prickly" from some of Annie's posts in the past. In fact, I have gone so far as to call her "self-righteous" before. (Yes, she still speaks with me! And I would totally buy her a drink any day of the week.)
In most cases, I still stand behind my response to her writing. But in this case? I just can't see it ... I have gone back and read all the tweets on this particular hash tag ... None of Annie's tweets had any kind of personal tone, snark, or inflammatory comparisons. They all seemed perfectly reasonable and pointed to research that seems (at first glance, I haven't studied it all) irrefutable.
I think perhaps the whole brouhaha started on the wrong foot because these moms were told "not to work for toothpaste" by another blogger. If I was a P&G Mom, I would probably get my back up on that one and then it might not be possible to read the other tweets objectively.
But when it all comes down to it, an ambassador is an ambassador. And twitter (and its hash tags) is a public forum. If you are an ambassador in a public forum, you've got to expect more than just pats on the back.
I understand. I agree.
And trust me, I get riled up too. I have a whole lot of respect for what you do and where you're coming from and I'm trying to figure out how to follow your example in using my voice to speak out about issues. Such as the sale of junk food/donuts in hospitals and at municipally-run rec facilities when nearly a third of kids are overweight and obese and there's a reported obesity-related health crisis that cost the province up to 2.5 billion last year.
That gets me riled up.
So I will be continuing to read here, and watch, and hopefully learn.
"And I would totally buy her a drink any day of the week."
I plan to take you up on that offer. :D
:)
I went through this exact experience a couple weeks ago when I butt into a Teflon Twitter party. I think you will enjoy this post! http://www.spitthatoutthebook.com/2012/10/mommy-war-fight-big-chemical/
This is not *my* fight (I care about toxicity in home products and try to use natural but it isn't something that is a big part of what I do on the Internet) but I have a few comments strictly from the perspective of someone who cares about blogging, bloggers, and blogger relationships with brands.
1. There is nothing wrong with going to an event to learn. However, in this case the language is "brand ambassador." A brand ambassador attending an event is different from a journalist attending a press junket or an attendee going to a conference or educational event. A brand ambassador is linking him or herself with the brand. As such, you should expect people to speak with you about the brand--in a positive way and in a negative way. I read about this from someone who received an invite but could not attend--there was an e-mail agreement that you were entering into a "relationship" with them as a "brand ambassador" according to this blogger.
2. This hashtag thing is a public conversation. No one owns a hashtag. A hashtag is simply a way to organize a conversation. If a brand wants to start a conversation, they must be prepared to hear all sides of the story, positive and negative. If they are not prepared for that, then they are not ready for a social media conversation. This is just social media 101.
I have been invited to events and into "relationships" (some paid, some not) with companies whose practices or products I find questionable. Most of these I have refused. There are some cases I can think of where I might work with a company like this, however. For example, there is a certain fast food chain--I don't eat their food and think there are some big ethical issues with their business...however, they run an amazing charity. If I were asked to work with them on their charity, and could be clear I was NOT endorsing their restaurants or business practices, I might work with them. At the same time, I would acknowledge that I could receive some flack for being linked with them at all. This is a decision I am making--a business decision as a person who has decided to conduct her business in a public sphere. If I am to benefit from having an audience, I have to also accept that my decisions that I publicly announce will be under scrutiny. I would weigh the pros and cons and make a decision and then stand by it.
I am not telling you who or who not to work with. I am not even saying P&G is evil. I am just saying that it is a bit disingenuous for one to claim to be a savvy businesswoman and act shocked and appalled that people have questions or claim people are "bullying" her or being "jerks" when they ask public questions about a corporation, using a hashtag designed to organize conversation with online moms about that company. These questions were on topic and expressed in a calm, rational way. The company, and anyone formally associated with the company, would be smart to address those questions in the same way.
BTW-- I have been on the other side of this. I have had a (very small, unpaid) relationship with a company that had practices some in this space criticized--right here on Annie's blog, in fact. But at no time did I call people bullies or jerks. I clarified my (very limited) relationship, explained my reasons for agreeing to it, listened to the concerns, and spoke to why I still supported the company.
Thanks so much for this wonderful post. I'm sorry to hear about the reaction some folks had to other folks just asking questions or pointing out unpopular facts about P&G products. Companies who engage in social media campaigns have to understand that not everyone participating in these very public conversations are going to support what they are doing. I think they should see the benefit of engaging in conversations with people who question what they produce and how they do do business. I know it's easier to listen to the cheerleaders though and ignore the challengers. This reminded me of the shower gel sponsored event at BlissDom Canada last month. The company did not respond (at least they didn't respond to me) to questions about whether or not their product was cruelty free, something which is important to me. Their silence on the topic was enough to put me off.
I absolutely agree that attending an event as a brand ambassador is different than attending an event just to learn or ask questions.
I've attended a lot of events that were for learning purposes. Sure, the companies that were sharing information with us probably hoped we would say positive things about what we were learning or seeing. But there certainly wasn't any obligation to do so.
That said, when I did attend those events, if I chose to share information on twitter or elsewhere, I have always been open to people sharing concerns, asking questions, or challenging the information that I presented. I would be happy to get back to them, either to explain why I respectfully disagreed with their viewpoint, to provide further information, or to thank them for the information they shared with me.
Interesting, Julie, that you seemed to really like my post when it was first published. I thought I was fair and reasonable and respectful throughout, the toothpaste thing notwithstanding. I have been open to reasonable discussion throughout and have yet to have anybody engage me personally in anything but open and friendly dialogue.
You're right Rebecca. I did like your post and I still do. I believe I tweeted that it was smart and came to smart conclusions as well. (I like all of the posts on this topic actually. Even the "Background Noise" post that said "screw you" because it made me laugh. Actually, I may have enjoyed that post the most because I really do like a good laugh even when it is directed at me!)
But after some of the dust is settled, I am thinking that the "toothpaste" thing might have caught people's emotions (and it was the specific tweet called out in "Background Noise" post). I noticed that you wrote in your comments that the toothpaste reference was "a bit of hyperbole to get attention." It was a great line and great writers need to use lines like that (just like Annie has used a song refrain in hers here). When I note that Annie's comments were fair, reasonable and respectful, I am not suggesting that yours were not.
If I haven't explained myself well here, please let me know.
Admit it, Julie. You just liked hearing someone say "screw you" to me. ;)
LOL! Okay, I just snorted out loud in my office to that one! (stop it!) I have a sneaking feeling I am going to need to buy you AND Rebecca drinks now :)
I agree with the commenter who stated: "This hashtag thing is a public conversation. No one owns a hashtag. A hashtag is simply a way to organize a conversation. If a brand wants to start a conversation, they must be prepared to hear all sides of the story, positive and negative. If they are not prepared for that, then they are not ready for a social media conversation. This is just social media 101."
I saw #PGMoms trending the other day and took a look over, I actually assumed it was the company having a dialog with the public about the toxicity of their products. I thought it was an open chat. most are there to invite conversation. So, I retweeted a few tweets (I think on of yours, Annie) and then went back to work. I didnt know there was a controversy until now.
It's obvious that social media has levelled the playing field.
I thin P&G learned something from this...at least I hope so.
Social media is where people get to express their opinions, ask questions, and if a brand is coming out on Twitter, its reps are going to be asked q's about their products. The reps should be prepared to answer. It's ok with me if people want to use those products, but in an open forum like Twitter, there will be people out there asking questions about the company.
J&J realized they couldn't hide anymore and has publicly decided to work towards reformulating their products.
I wonder what P&G is going to take away from this.
It will be interesting to see P&Gs response.
Annie you are always on the edge of the conversation!
Love it!
kathy
All fair points, Julie. We're good :)
Great article Anne. I like the way you speak your mind! You definitely have to be informed on the products when you become an ambassador and tweet about them. To me an ambassador is the face of the company. It's a personal choice to be or not to be one, and you have to face the music when people ask questions.
Don't put anything on your skin that you wouldn't eat. Those toxins enter into your body and blood stream via pores. And of course a woman who wouldn't put anything on her skin that she wouldn't eat wouldn't put it on her baby's skin either.
Hemp oil, macademia nut oil, coconut oil, these are good oils for baby's (and mom's) skin.
I fully agree with this statement. Well written post too Annie!
It took me a while to process all of the feedback. Here are my thoughts: http://www.urbanmommies.com/for-moms/on-being-an-ambassador/
It takes courage and conviction to share what you did. It is an important message delivered well. Disputing large corporations is overwhelming and even scary sometimes. As someone who had a brief stint with Cancer, I have a deep and sincere feeling of gratitude to you and others who pass up the free trip in the interest of keeping my children free of such a horrific disease.
This is why I do research before I work with any company -- especially the big ones. Since Thanks for this post, Annie. As always, you write about a very important subjects -- the slippery slope of bloggers working as paid ambassadors.
Nestle, for example, owns or is connected to half of the big companies that have huge budgets and pay well, that cancels out a lot of companies for me as a breastfeeding advocate, Nestle boycotter, and green living advocate. I could make a lot more money -- but I don't want to attach my name to companies that make harmful products. I try my very best to not have that happen
And people need to get more informed and not believe every advertising slogan about a product being "natural" or "gentle for baby." It's unfortunate that those other bloggers had to get mean about you just wanting to inform parents about the truth about P&G products.
[...] and Gamble responds to good questions poorly. [...]