The ‘Whose tweet is it anyway’ editorial was a very interesting read and it touches on various points which are could be debated and discussed for hours on end, especially by people who are interested in social media and what it means for companies, its brands as well as it employees. Some companies have captured and understood the importance of putting in place different structures that better fit the changing times and generations and other have just disregarded the changing times and remained the same and made small and insignificant changes to a fast evolving society.
This editorial goes in to detail and gives examples of brands that have had encounters with the changing dynamics of the personal and business space, due to the exponential growth of online usage by individuals. All individuals who have online profiles whether on Twitter, Facebook and other social media are considered brands, and therefore one could argue that when they join a company the businesses brand and the individuals (personal) brand, are in partnership and therefore should be treated accordingly. Many companies I believe do not consider the importance of individuals brand and how it can easily affect its own brand, and therefore company policies should adapt to this new spread and access of information, in this current generation.
My favourite example in the book, was the example given of radio dj’s and how they used company time (Radio slots) to advertise their personal twitter handles and blogs, but when that individual leaves they take their following with them, Gareth Cliff and Anele Mdoda are examples of such. I know numerous people who watch cliff central and list to 94.7fm, simply because those two radio dj’s told their followers about their move and new journey, and stuck with them. Leaving 5fm with less followers, although had those two dj’s not have been 5fm dj‘s, the possibility that they would have such a huge following decreases largely, therefore the question is; who do the followers belong to?