Public and charity sector approaches to social media are changing

Anyone working in the charity sector knows how vital social media is as a free communications and engagement channel. Not only does it increase visibility to raise awareness about their causes and drive fundraising efforts, but it allows charities to engage directly with their audiences to promote transparency and develop trust. It provides a cost-effective and versatile public platform that can make a substantial impact on their missions and objectives.

Hitting the right tone on social media shapes how the public perceives any organisation and the reputation it builds over time. The correct and appropriate tone of voice influences authenticity, engagement, trust, relevance, and the ability to navigate crises effectively. 

So what has caused some charities to veer off from the traditionally safe and structured corporate narrative, and replace it with the more humanised and potentially riskier social media strategy used by the likes of private sector giants Ryanair and Aldi? Is it a risk worth taking or a reputational crisis in the making? 

The Ryanair effect

The social media landscape has changed dramatically in recent years to keep up with consumer demand. Social media was never designed to be stuffy and corporate with rigid customer service standards dictating the structure of messages. If we strip it back, one meaning for the word ‘social’ is: relating to the things you do with other people for enjoyment when you are not working.

With so much noise to cut through, organisations have had to think differently about how they engage with audiences on social to maximise enjoyment from their content. However, this change in style has led to content and interactions becoming more relaxed and sometimes irreverent in style. One of many private organisations adopting this approach as part of their social media strategy is Ryanair. 

In a podcast interview with Sprout Social, Ryanair’s head of social and creative content, Michael Corcoran, describes the airline’s social media strategy as: “Being disruptive, playful, provocative, we know is going to grab attention for good and for bad.”

Other organisations, particularly in retail, such as Aldi, Innocent Drinks, Specsavers, and language app Duolingo have taken note of Ryanair’s seemingly maverick approach and consequently they too have seen their social presence skyrocket. The correlation has not gone unnoticed. Social media users themselves are beginning to get wise to this approach, with social media execs even questioning whether it is appropriate for the public sector. Most of the time, people seem to enjoy the cheekier approach, especially when brands interact online with one another. 

It’s this wider change in narrative by brands on social media that has paved the way for some social media managers in the public and charitable sectors to become braver in how they too present their organisations online.

Testing political boundaries 

Is it this shift in public perceptions of brands generally that has given some charitable organisations more freedom to openly express themselves politically on social media? It appears that some might be testing the boundaries. Whether this is a considered strategy to attract headlines for their cause, or if it is simply a case of social media manager gone rogue is unclear. However, the outcome in two recent cases involving the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB) and Disability Rights UK has been the same – their uncharacteristically outspoken comments have whipped up a social media storm. 

The charities feeling the heat

In August last year, the RSPB had to publicly go on record to confirm that no, they were not entering politics. This followed a heated thread posted to their Twitter (X) feed accusing the government of lying about their environmental commitments. Not only was the thread very unlike their usual measured, firm, yet professional tone, but the posts were accompanied by what could be viewed as highly provocative graphics. The images posted included prime minister Rishi Sunak alongside government ministers Michael Gove and Thérѐse Coffey with the word “LIARS!” angrily stamped in red across the image. This sparked a huge debate online about the conduct of charity organisations, who in accordance with Charity Commission rules, should remain politically neutral, with calls from some MPs to strip the organisation of their charitable status. 

The RSPB were quick to retract the statements made on social media and apologise – no surprise there. However, what was particularly surprising was the focus given to how the tweets had been worded. In an interview with Radio 4, RSPB chief executive Beccy Speight said: “So, the framing of that tweet, where we called out individual people, we felt was incorrect and inappropriate, and we apologise for that.”

Reading between the lines it seems that the person or persons responsible for posting to RSPB Twitter let their personal frustrations on the topic get the better of them. A reminder then that anyone who is given the responsibility to be the voice of your organisation via social media should be given the appropriate training. Clear guidance and protocols should also be in place to define brand tone of voice, including guidance on political neutrality (if applicable). 

The worst action an organisation can take in response to a badly judged social media post is delete it without first acknowledging its flaws and issuing an apology – if indeed one is warranted. In such an event, it’s recommended as part of any social media crisis comms plan that the offending post(s) should be removed from all affected social media channels, but only if a public apology or explanation precedes or immediately follows deletion. 

This tactic was employed by Disability Rights UK, who as soon as they realised that their account had posted tweets branding the government’s “Ask, don’t assume” campaign “murderous”, deleted them from the channel, swiftly followed by an apology. Once again, it would appear that the statement given on social media in response to the campaign launch wasn’t representative of Disability UK’s usual conduct online.  

What has perhaps been most surprising about the management of the RSPB’s recent social media crisis, is their unusual decision to keep the thread of offending tweets on their Twitter feed, which are still available to view two months on. Although they have given an explanation for this: “We felt it important that the tweet remained so people could understand the context of our robust apology.”

Where being bold does pay off

On the other side of the coin are the charitable organisations proactively being bold on social media to make a statement in a good way. The Royal National Lifeboat Institution (RNLI) were applauded for standing firm when heavy criticism of their aims and objectives by traditional press spilled over onto social media. Understanding the Twitter landscape enabled them to stand tall against the negative furore and produce considered and well-structured posts, allowing them to get their messages across clearly and without ambiguity. 

Be more Ryanair without the drama

It is possible to take some inspiration from the big corporates carving a bolder path on social without dragging your organisation into a reputational crisis. After all, social media for the most part is supposed to engage, entertain, and empower us. 

Here are our tips for adding the human element to your social media posts whilst keeping your reputation intact: 

• Be clear on your tone of voice – decide how you want your social media voice to come across, ideally you want to achieve the right mix of friendly, human, and where appropriate fun, balanced with professional and trustworthy. 
• Set definitive boundaries – ensure those writing for social are clear on where the lines are. Do they understand the need for political neutrality? Are they a good judge of when it’s appropriate to be more relaxed vs corporate in tone? 
• Identify some “safe” areas of the business where you can proactively test incorporating a more human voice – this will allow you to experiment with what works and what doesn’t in a more controlled way.  
• Have a sign-off process in place – even experienced writers for social media can get it wrong. Ensure there is a process in place for sense-checking and proof-reading, particularly around sensitive issues. 
• If you get it wrong, own it. Don’t try and sweep it under the digital carpet.
• In the event it does go wrong, have a crisis comms plan that includes a step-by-step process of how you will deal with the matter on social media. i.e., what the reporting line is, who you will get to make a statement, who you will issue the statement to, and if/when you will delete the original post.
• If you are a charity, make sure you are up to date with the latest social media guidelines from the Charity Commission – there are some heavy consequences for charities who do not follow this guidance. 

What next?

It’s certainly going to be interesting to see how public and charity sector organisations continue to evolve their social media strategies to remain current with their audiences. 

From what we have seen so far, the changing landscape created by the likes of Ryanair and Aldi will have rubbed off on some social media managers looking to emulate their success. However, it appears that a lack of training and accountability of those responsible for posting on social media has led to organisational lines being blurred and, in some cases, crossed – particularly when it comes to political points of view. 

This feeds in nicely to our recent event on Insider Risk. Those staff with access to corporate social media accounts are in some respects the voice of your brand. Therefore, it certainly pays to invest in their skills and training to help mitigate the risk of potentially reputationally damaging posts appearing on your feed. One thing we can be certain of is that the organisations we have reviewed here won’t be last to experience a social media led crisis. 

The CIPR Crisis Communications Network would love to hear your comments on this and any experiences you’ve had, good or bad. Please do get in touch with us via our social media channels, or via email.

Lucy Salvage is digital content creator for The Chartered Institute of Environmental Health and social media manager for CIPR Crisis Communications Network, where this blog was first published. Read the original (titled Re-discovering their voice: How charities are adapting social media personas under the spotlight of public scrutiny).