Post by mirzayanbh on Oct 9, 2014 21:59:12 GMT -5
In 2012, Planned Parenthood utilized social media to publicly launch a campaign against Susan G. Komen for the Cure, who announced they were planning to cut off grant funding to many organizations, including Planned Parenthood. While Planned Parenthood did not establish this as a social media fundraising campaign, it's a good subject to discuss considering it brought in something around $3 million in donations and picked up more than 10,000 "likes" on Facebook. Likewise, the attention attracted by all the buzz on social media platforms led to the establishment of new relations, including one with successful nonprofit Livestrong. Not to mention that Susan G. Komen reversed their decision to cut off funding - and, hey, more money is always good.
Because this is such a unique case, it's important to look at it from all angles. To analyze the success of Planned Parenthood's success, let us first look at Susan G. Komen's shortcomings. While there are many aspects of their crisis communications technique that can (and should be) criticized, their social media strategy in this situation was nothing but a disservice. Every message they sent out was from a tip sheet. Every tweet was just a reference to a press release. Nothing was sincere. Furthermore, it gets worse! Not only did they put in the effort to clean their Facebook page of negative comments, but several staff members made bold statements on Twitter that were later gone back and deleted. If I've learned anything from this class, it's that social media can get you into a lot of trouble when used incorrectly, and Susan G. Komen broke all the rules.
In one of our Google Hangouts this week, Sarah Milston of the Spark Mill gave her third fundraising tip for nonprofits on social media which included, "Create ambassadors," which is exactly what Planned Parenthood did. Hashtags like "Planned Parenthood" started popping up alongside Facebook pages like "De-fund the Komen Foundation," bringing a lot of attention to the situation. A Twitter spokesperson reported over 1.3 million tweets referencing Planned Parenthood around the time of the campaign against the Komen foundation. Planned Parenthood even utilized a sponsored tweet which, as it turns out, wasn't such a bad idea.
There's a lot of discussion to be had around the issue, but for brevity's sake let's talk about what could have been changed (which, admittedly, isn't too much when considering the results). First of all, the campaign against the Komen Foundation was something of an attack towards them. Considering they reversed their decision, now a relationship has to be continued between the two organizations, and now they're forced to swim through muddy waters. Especially in public relations, it's best not to burn your (interorganizational) bridges. Otherwise, Planned Parenthood should have taken a page out of The Spark Mill's tip sheet (#9, specifically,) and thanked their supporters. There was certainly relationships to be maintained throughout this whole fiasco, and it seems that Planned Parenthood hasn't made much of an effort to reach into the past and continue to remind their supporters of the difference they made throughout the campaign.
Because this is such a unique case, it's important to look at it from all angles. To analyze the success of Planned Parenthood's success, let us first look at Susan G. Komen's shortcomings. While there are many aspects of their crisis communications technique that can (and should be) criticized, their social media strategy in this situation was nothing but a disservice. Every message they sent out was from a tip sheet. Every tweet was just a reference to a press release. Nothing was sincere. Furthermore, it gets worse! Not only did they put in the effort to clean their Facebook page of negative comments, but several staff members made bold statements on Twitter that were later gone back and deleted. If I've learned anything from this class, it's that social media can get you into a lot of trouble when used incorrectly, and Susan G. Komen broke all the rules.
In one of our Google Hangouts this week, Sarah Milston of the Spark Mill gave her third fundraising tip for nonprofits on social media which included, "Create ambassadors," which is exactly what Planned Parenthood did. Hashtags like "Planned Parenthood" started popping up alongside Facebook pages like "De-fund the Komen Foundation," bringing a lot of attention to the situation. A Twitter spokesperson reported over 1.3 million tweets referencing Planned Parenthood around the time of the campaign against the Komen foundation. Planned Parenthood even utilized a sponsored tweet which, as it turns out, wasn't such a bad idea.
There's a lot of discussion to be had around the issue, but for brevity's sake let's talk about what could have been changed (which, admittedly, isn't too much when considering the results). First of all, the campaign against the Komen Foundation was something of an attack towards them. Considering they reversed their decision, now a relationship has to be continued between the two organizations, and now they're forced to swim through muddy waters. Especially in public relations, it's best not to burn your (interorganizational) bridges. Otherwise, Planned Parenthood should have taken a page out of The Spark Mill's tip sheet (#9, specifically,) and thanked their supporters. There was certainly relationships to be maintained throughout this whole fiasco, and it seems that Planned Parenthood hasn't made much of an effort to reach into the past and continue to remind their supporters of the difference they made throughout the campaign.