The Role of Social Media in the Criminal Landscape

The recent events of the Osama raid has gotten me thinking about the increasing role of social media being used as a source of data, evidence, proof, etc in situations such as government take-downs or criminal cases.

TIME magazine reported that a resident of Abbottabad, Pakistan, who just happened to live a stone's throw from the Osama compound, actually detailed the event via Twitter without knowing what events were occurring.

Upon learning what he was reporting on his Twitter account, Sohaib Athar, the Abbottabad resident, tweeted, "Uh oh, now I'm the guy who liveblogged the Osama raid without knowing it." And while some might be excited about living out their 15 seconds of fame, Athar didn't seem to be jumping for joy:

Athar unknowingly, yet successfully, detailed the attack from a civilian's point of view and became a reference point for many media outlets and civilians just looking for more information on the raid.

This is what got me thinking about the role of social media: how are platforms such as Twitter and Facebook increasingly being used to detail attacks or provide evidence in trials?

According to The New York Daily News, Twitter was being used as evidence in a murder trial in January 2010. The suspect, Jameg Blake, reportedly had "beef" with long-time friend/victim Kwame Dancy that possibly led to the latter's murder. The NY Daily News reported, "A police source said the messages may be subpoenaed to bolster the theory that there was bad blood between the two old pals." While tweets alone are not nearly enough to convict someone of a crime, this just goes to show how social media platforms are beginning to play a role in these types of situations. The Tech Herald reasoned that while this is most likely the first time Twitter has played a such role, "...as most and more people flood the various social sites with comments, opinions and even arguments, this might not be the last time Twitter is linked to a criminal case."

Federal Computer Week also reported how social media is being used to catch criminals. In an article dating April 5, the publication described how police forces are combing through social media sites for evidence or for information on how to track suspects. According to FCW:

On the flip side, the article also argued that police officers need to be careful about protecting themselves on these sites. Because gangs are becoming more savvy about social media platforms, they can look at photos to recognize officers and track GPS postings, which leaves officers more prone to an attack.

Some police departments have been efficient at using social media platforms as a source of PR to boost the public's morale.

I'm interested to see how these social media sites will continue to shape the landscape of the criminal field.

Quack Quack, AFLAC!

Aflac announced the new voice of its fair-feathered duck friend yesterday. Thirty-six year-old father of three, Daniel McKeague was chosen out of a pool of over 12,500 applications.

Aflac fired comedian Gilbert Gottfried after he tweeted some ill-mannered thoughts about the tsunami in Japan last month. According to Ad Age, Japan is Aflac's largest market, so they were wise to dump the not-so-funny comedian. Shortly after, Aflac launched a campaign titled "Answer the Duck's Call" to find the new voice.

Tom Amico from Kaplan Thaler Group, one of Aflac's agencies, was a bit of a jokester when asked what he was looking for during auditions. "I'm just looking for somebody who makes me laugh, so it's very subjective. And then I hope to impose my subjectivity onto... the American people." But in all seriousness, he said, "We want it to sound similar, but different."

Well, look no further. McKeague's slightly burlier voice is not, in my opinion, too far of a stretch from Gottfried's annoying duck quack.

McKeague is a Minnesota resident and a sales manager of a couple local radio stations, so his voice is already used to a bit of local fame. Below is a video of him receiving the news he is the new voice of the webbed-toed icon.





My favorite part about the video is the fact that CEO Dan Amos, President & COO Paul Amos and Senior VP-CMO Michael Zuna are all hunched around a desk bearing American and Japanese flags. Aflac is sending the right message to their Japanese viewers by telling them that the company, and its new voice, don't support the tweets by Gottfried.

Many people were worrying that no one could replace Gottfried's signature quack, but I think McKeague will do just fine. Want proof? Check out the commercial that aired last night debuting his Aflac quack:

Google's "Like" Button

Last month, Google announced it will be incorporating its own version of the Facebook "like" button- called the "plus one" button. After they failed miserably trying to beat out Facebook and Twitter with their Google Buzz platform, Google will be using the plus-one button to yet again take on these social media empires.

I think the plus-one button will be more successful than Google Buzz, however, because Google is utilizing it for general search engine purposes. Users can use the plus-one button to vote on search results they find useful and then have the opportunity to share this on Google platforms such as Gchat, Gmail, Google Reader, Google Buzz and Twitter.

I was unaware of this last platform being included in the new plus-one voting system and was semi-creeped out when I noticed that one of my Twitter followers had shared the link on her Twitter.

I was Googling the PRSSA National Conference and underneath the link, I noticed my friend (and trustee PRSSA VP for next year) had liked the link as well. Then Google asked me if I was "sarahkilbourne." This really got me considering I wasn't even logged into Twitter at the time!

Sorry the image is a bit pixelated.

In my opinion, this move should work well for Google, not to mention the organizations or businesses who's links are being voted on because consumers always trust word of mouth over any advertising that a company can produce.

Google said they will eventually integrate the plus-one system into their search algorithm so that human votes will have an impact on search ranking. I've heard that companies can pay to have their links show up higher in the results; I'm not sure how true this is, but this new system would overrule that, replacing it with a heavier impact coming from human votes.

In an article appearing on the Ad Age Digital website, Google's Principle Engineer for Search Matt Cutts said, "When someone recommends something, that's a pretty good indicator of quality...We are strongly looking at using this in our rankings."

So far, that's the only plus-one vote I've seen so far, but I'm excited to see it show up more often in search rankings.

Starbucks is Stalking Me

I'm used to being targeted by advertisers on Facebook based on the likes and interest I list on my profile.

I am not, however, used to a) being targeted with personal information on Pandora or b) seen my name appear in the advertising.

Being the studious person I am, I was listening to Pandora yesterday while doing homework. It's pretty annoying when they stop every 20 minutes-- yes, I'm still listening. But it is a smart way to pull the consumers to the advertisements on the page.

Anyways, this is when I noticed a Starbucks cup with my name written on it and an order that was creepily similar to what I sometimes order there.


I'm sure the double tall, extra foam, caramel macchiato order was just a coincidence. But it does make me wonder, because I had to create a YouTube account to upload a video for a marketing project last year and the username includes caramel macchiato (the client was a coffee shop). Pretty big coincidence, huh? But as far as I can tall, there is no direct link between Pandora and YouTube.

Another thing to think about in dealing with consumer-targeted marketing is how far is too far? My Pandora username does not include my name, so Pandora had to have released my personal account information for Starbucks to target me in such a manor. And while giving away my first name is not a big deal, to what lengths are companies going to go to get this information-- or how much information are social media services willing to give away to make money?

The new FTC rules on social media focus on disclosure information, but should they extend regulations to consumer-targeted marketing issues?

Google's April Fools' Prank Turned into Reality

Google is notorious for their April Fools' Day pranks. In the spirit of the tradition last year, the company pulled a switcheroo with the town of Topeka, Kansas after the town's Mayor announced he was changing the name to Google for one month for "fun."

eWeek chronicles Google's pranks from 2000-2010 in this slideshow.

This year, the Institute of Creative Technologies took one of Google's pranks one step further.

Those who use the email service Gmail may have noticed last Thursday bright red text at the top right of the page urging customers to use the new Google Motion technology. One the use clicked to try out the new technology, they received a nice little APRIL FOOLS!

However, the ICT team put the idea into motion using a Microsoft Kinect sensor to control body motions. The technology recognizes basic body motions such as open, reply, thinking ahead and sending off the message. Check out the video on Mashable's site.

I hope Google puts this technology into use!

The Homesless American Girl Doll

In doing homework for my PR Case Studies class, I came across a case about how the Vermont Teddy Bear Company developed a "Crazy for You" bear for Valentine's Day 2005. The bear, fitted in a straitjacket with commitment papers, was meant to send a message of complete craze over a loved one, but instead outraged mental health advocates saying the doll encouraged stereotypes and misperceptions about mental illness.

I was interested to find out more information, so I Googled the story. Turns out the company decided not to pull the product despite growing complaints from mental health associations and ended up selling out of the product.

In any case, one of the hits that came up in the Google search was a TIME's article titled, "Top 10 Dubious Toys."

The #1 dubious product was from American Girl Co. (my favorite company in elementary school!) The doll named Gwen was, as the article describes it, "cute and cuddly and also happens to be homeless."

Many moms criticized the product calling it insensitive. One blogger lashed back noting, "The only thing obscene about this American Girl controversy is that it takes a plastic doll and her fictional biography to have everyone up in arms. Yet the real stories of homeless children crowding shelters and schools are accepted without an ounce of outrage."

Much like the "Crazy for You" bear, the two companies could have better handled these controveries. Instead of creating insensitive and offensive products for profit, the least they could have done after the complaints was donate some of the profits to homeless shelters in the American Girl case, and mental health associations in VT Teddy Bear's case.

Makes you think twice about when companies say they are socially and corporately responsible. Planting a few trees doesn't make up for offending numerous homeless or mentally-afflicted Americans and their loved ones.

Why PRiorities?

I've decided to start blogging about things I find interesting in the fields of public relations, marketing and advertising.

So... why PRiorities?

You can't have PR without establishing your priorities:
-situation analysis
-research
-planning
-execution
-evaluation

Mostly, it's just a cutesy name I came up with to try to have a creative public relations blog name.