22
Reflections of a Board Chair on the Christchurch Massacre: Governing Social Media
Drew Stein
Board Chair and Professional Director
Introduction
For some considerable time now I've been concerned at the growth, influence, and impact as well as in particular the manner in which social media has been able to shape public attitudes. The “Me Too” movement plus other similar uses of social media channels have demonstrated the power that social media channels provide to various groups of individuals who use these channels to influence public opinion. While some may argue that social media provides a platform for minorities to get their messages across to the wider public, unfortunately it also provides a gateway without restriction for attitudes and doctrines which are morally offensive to the wider public to be espoused and promoted.
While writing my chapter addressing managing social media in a business sense for this publication an event happened in my country, New Zealand, which shook the very foundations of our society. Overnight we lost our innocence as a nation with the Christchurch Massacre. There has been an outpouring of grief across the country like I've never witnessed before affecting all levels of our society. We have all felt the hurt and sorrow for those affected and are continually questioning how this could have happened in our small slice of paradise which we all call home.
As we as a country are coming to grips with the aftermath of this tragic event answers are beginning to surface as to the causative factors involved which significantly influenced and drove the terrorist's actions. It has become obvious that the Internet and social media were the world in which he lived. One reputable and knowledgeable expert has commented that from information now available it was obvious that the individual lived in chat rooms and his country was an international alternative universe where uses of the various social media channels reinforced various prejudices, nudging people further down different rabbit holes. He further went on to comment that the view channels such as YouTube have been giving us is that they are neutral conduits for what people put up but this attitude is getting harder to reconcile with the model where they use predictive algorithms to foist content on the general public. Sean Gowley, CEO of California Artificial Intelligence Company, has stated that recommendation engines are playing a big role in driving people toward extremist behavior.
Without any doubt at all, social media was the world in which the Christchurch terrorist lived and its messaging and hate-filled mantra were the driving factors which influenced his actions. He used social media to live-stream the massacre and social media management took almost an hour to block transmission.
But perhaps even in adversity there may be some glimmer of hope that social media may be forced to comply with what would be accepted as normal public behavior. As an aftermath of the Christchurch massacre, some countries have already begun in a legal sense to tighten their laws around social media content and streaming; some major companies and governments have restricted their online advertising; and there's a rising call worldwide for social media sites to begin to demonstrate a reasonable sense of behavior around racist and radical hate-filled messaging which use their services to promote their ideologues.
So you may ask, where does this terrible event figure in any discussion relating to the issue of governance as it influences best business practice? The content of my chapter does not endeavor to address the inherent issues around social media management and regulation, which is a huge question which governments and other related national organizations are better qualified to address than myself. Rather, my chapter outlines from my experience working with various boards and organizations how businesses might approach managing their own issues around social media attacks where such attacks have the potential to destroy a hard-worked-for business reputation and ultimately undermine the organization's financial results. I apologize if my opening comments may be somewhat personal but these should not in any manner take away or diminish the thrust of the processes outlined in this chapter.
The Impact of Social Media on Corporate Governance
Business enterprises as we know them today, be they traders, service providers, or corporate bodies, have over the years faced numerous challenges in which they have voluntarily, either as a result of market forces, technology advances, or via government regulation, amended or changed their mode of operating. Think of the mid-nineteenth-century Industrial Revolution, the Great Depression of the 1930s, the forceful monopoly breakups which savaged the oil, steel, and transport industries, the population shifts from country to urban dwellers, and more recently the frequent financial crises of the late twentieth century. Through all of these major events most business enterprises quickly grasped and understood the marketplace pressures resulting from the new and unpredictable circumstances they faced and moved to make the changes required to their operating parameters which underpinned their varying business models. In other words, history shows that business enterprises have proven that even in the most adverse circumstances they can adapt to the volatile market conditions in which they operate in order to survive.
However, businesses are not amorphous living beings in the real sense of the word. It is the people involved in the enterprise right from the ground floor to the boardroom who provide the business with its lifeblood. It is the leaders within the enterprise that provide the wisdom, guidance, and direction which ensure the business's success and well-being. In order to undertake this task successfully the leaders (board members), among the other professional director attributes they require as a board members, need to be continually aware of outside influences or shifts in market and public perceptions which might negatively affect their business model and thus the underlying drivers which ensure a positive performance. This is a task which is and has become absolutely critical in today's technologically driven processes, where communication can almost instantly broadcast to a broad spectrum of the population and thus can influence marketplace forces feeding public perception and subsequent reactions.
Leading this revolution is the new and very real danger posed to business by social media where unsubstantiated comments can be presented to a very large audience as facts without the business having the opportunity to refute or correct the misconception. The problem is compounded by the time factor, where even in situations where the business has responded in a timely fashion setting the record straight, the original social media comments have spread via the Internet extremely quickly and the business's response will simply generate more social media traffic without any acknowledgment of the correctional response posted.
Apart from what would be regarded as normal business activities being the basis for negative social media comment, there is an alarming trend for personal attacks on directors and senior executives via this medium. Such social media comments can be disastrous for any business as there is a direct flow of public perception from a damaged reputation of a business leader to the well-being of the company they are involved with, which in turn can negatively affect revenue streams and thus profitability and shareholder earnings.
Therefore, given the growing use of social media by individuals and various groups plus the general public's attitude in believing what is presented as fact, in my opinion, positively managing, and overseeing the managing of, social media is the next big issue facing business and company boards today.
Boards and Companies Are Not Immune
It would be foolish and irresponsible to believe that social media will somehow bypass your business and that your business processes are sufficiently robust to be able to manage any negative social media event. The problem is that social media continues to morph itself into various shapes pitched to the writer's point of view and is no longer a simple open communication vehicle. It has in fact developed into a platform where a single individual can intentionally create havoc by posting to a wide audience false information about a company or its directors and executives. This problem is further compounded by the fact that mainstream media today tend to chase any negativity they perceive in pursuit of ratings, in most cases without checking the facts or presenting a balanced picture.
Given the growth of social media as a communication medium and the dangers it can present to business in today's markets, the trick is not simply managing the negative side of what this communication vehicle represents but more importantly how to turn the negative into a positive response and by so doing position the business on the high ground. But how to do this in such a volatile environment and protect the business and its investors?
We need to go back in time as there are lessons to be learned from the past. As already noted, business as a commercial model, providing a service to the public and supporting its investors, has survived and flourished through some horrendously difficult times and one of the important supporting doctrines during that period that has contributed to this success has been the adherence at board and leadership levels to an internal code of discipline. This code existed within most businesses under various titles such as “Board Protocols,” “Directors' Rules and Regulations,” and so on, which we would recognize today, although somewhat different in style, as being the Governance Charter document (see Appendix One in this chapter). This code of discipline basically laid out in very broad terms the boundaries and parameters around which the leaders of the business would function and operate with all key decisions being tested and measured against the benchmarks established. Any variance would be matched against the need to change direction and thus amend the manner in which the code of discipline was applied.
So, if governance as a discipline assisted businesses in the past to adjust to changing market forces and survive, then surely it is not too much of a stretch to reach the conclusion that governance as a discipline can assist in supporting and managing social media issues in today's environment.
The Meaning of Governance
However, let's be clear about what we mean by governance in today's professional market. I have read and heard many descriptions explaining governance. These range from the holistic view that governance is the all-embracing control document of any business through to a view that it is simply a collection of directional business agendas. Interesting that Ian McVeigh of Jupiter Asset Management, when commenting on the recent corporate debacle at VW, stated “It's the moment in the sun for Corporate Governance.” But what is meant by the word governance? As I've worked with and on various boards I have found interpretations vary. However, from my experience I would define governance as follows:
A board charter document which establishes the overarching philosophy by which the board and executives will manage the business processes in order to ensure that the behavior of the business and its staff is compatible with best practice, sensitive to the market and the wishes of the stakeholders.
Now, you can argue that this definition is too broad or not sufficiently definitive but I believe it covers in a holistic sense the real essence of the purpose of what governance is all about. The key word in this definition is “behavior,” which in context refers to business, commercial, and professional behavior, including how the business as an entity is expected to present itself and behave in the public arena and with its customers.
Governance Document
Therefore what are the steps necessary to ensure that the governance document within your enterprise is sufficiently robust to be able to assist and support the board and executives in managing any negative social media impact which could affect your business? The natural first step is to understand what your current governance document addresses and presents as a methodology associated with the expected professional and corporate behavior of its leaders. To obtain a complete understanding of your current governance positioning requires an audit of your current document. It goes without saying that to obtain the most positive and transparent audit requires the involvement of an external experienced professional. The Wall Street Journal some time ago published an article which stated that “nineteen percent of the U.S. largest companies over recent years have contracted in so-called Board Doctors to evaluate board performance.” I wrote an article a few years ago covering in broad terms the same subject but focused on the importance of undertaking a regular corporate governance audit and detailing the processes required to achieve a transparent and balanced conclusion. An abbreviated version of my article is provided at the conclusion of this chapter (Appendix Two).
Having through the audit understood where your baseline governance document places your business in terms of expected corporate behavior, the next step is to address the “what-if” scenarios relating to attacks via social media channels. There are far too many what-ifs to address in this chapter, but let us address the more common ones which we have witnessed in the marketplace recently and work through possible reactions which can then be enshrined and cemented into the business corporate governance document.
Social Media Attacks
It needs to be stated from the outset that there is no cookie-cutter model which will apply to all circumstances. The key to confronting social media attacks is to use a large dose of common sense flavored with the understanding that, if not managed correctly, such attacks have the possibility of dramatically and negatively affecting your business model and thus your business's performance.
The following are a few examples of how to manage specific social media attacks and while in no means definitive, they provide a basis which can easily be morphed in an abbreviated form into your governance document. Remember your governance document sets the standard which outlines the holistic behavior which the business will be measured against and thus it is vitally important that the parameters for managing social media are included within the document and not treated as a separate standalone issue.
A Product Attack
This is probably the easiest problem to manage. If there is a product problem and the social media position is based on factual evidence, then it is best to be up front and acknowledge the problem and guarantee to fix the issues, which have been highlighted, making sure in your response you cover the full spectrum of social media channels and advise your staff accordingly.
On the other hand, if the complaint has no basis or is frivolous, then it is vital that you adopt a strong media stance by going directly to the original social media source while communicating the message through all the other channels, stating the facts and inviting those concerned to personally contact or meet with you to discuss. In most cases presenting the facts and being open and transparent by inviting direct communication will end the matter. However, in the very rare cases where social media continues to make false statements it is prudent to use print media to state your case and also wise to take legal counsel. A point to remember is that in today's environment almost all of your staff will have access to the social media channels. Therefore it is critical that you keep your staff informed as an integral part of your communication strategy.
A Service Attack
This type of attack can gain momentum via social media extremely quickly if not addressed in an urgent sense. The first step is through internal channels to check the validity of the complaint while immediately advising the complainant you are investigating their concerns and requesting in a cooperative manner if they could supply times, dates, and facts. If the issue highlighted by the complainant is real, quickly acknowledge this fact and detail the steps you are taking to rectify the situation. However, the problem arises where the complaint is false.
This raises the question whether a genuine mistake has been made by the complainant or there is a mischievous intent involved, associated with damaging the business's reputation. If the latter, then you need to both offer an olive branch by inviting the complainant to a meeting to discuss while at the same time playing hardball and making it clear that you have investigated the situation and can find no facts to support their contention of bad service. Remember all your communication with the complainant will be open on the social media platform and therefore your messages need to be direct and concise in order to endeavor to shut down any further collective dialogue.
A Marketplace Behavior Attack
We have witnessed such attacks within the international market on numerous occasions recently. Some, such as the VW debacle, are self-inflicted, but most are the result of situations where businesses have failed to adequately read the marketplace nuances and public acceptance levels. However, it needs to be understood that most social media attacks within the sector we are addressing are driven by the ideology of the perpetrators. For example, there has recently been a growing attention by certain focused groups on targeting businesses' commercial advertising programs, complaining about everything from race representation to gender issues.
While to the majority of the public the issues may seem petty, using social media the perpetrators address a huge audience and if not addressed quickly can lead to the call for boycotts or at worst demonstrations. It is not the intention of this chapter to outline the decision-making processes necessary to avoid such problems as this is an entirely different subject, but rather to address how to manage a social media problem of this type should it arise whether self-inflicted or otherwise. The first step is to immediately determine if the issue raised is real or imaginary and regardless of the answer to that question how the issue might affect your business model.
Remember while social media activists purport to represent a large constituency, in reality in most cases their numbers are small but highly vocal and being driven by ideology lack the ability to rationalize coherent arguments. Therefore it is critically important to understand how such a social media attack might affect your business and then tailor your response accordingly. There is no cookie-cutter model to follow, as each situation will be different; however, there are some guidelines worth mentioning.
If it is believed that the attack is unwarranted and lacks credibility, establish a strong defendable position and go to the market immediately explaining your position. Some issues such as gender and race are extremely divisive and require extremely careful handling but if you believe your position is sustainable in both a professional and business sense, then make your points strongly and with conviction. On the other hand, if you have determined that the social media impact, whether the perpetrators are right or wrong, has the ability to negatively affect your business if not addressed and rectified, then move quietly with professional grace, keeping social media advised of your intentions. In fact some situations if managed with dignity can enhance your business's reputation.
Remember social media is all about perception rather than fact. Never overreact but make sure you undertake a steady, measured appraisal of the situation before deciding on a course of action, keeping in mind that the key factor which drives your business is how your customers and clients as well as the general public view your marketplace behavior.
A Personal Attack on a Senior Staff Member or Director
This is probably one of the most difficult situations to manage and is becoming more prevalent as social media becomes the home for more vocal voices. The damage to a business cannot be underestimated if these types of social media attacks are not managed in a professional manner. Again, perception is everything.
The underlying problem is that perpetrators can make statements via social media which are accepted as fact and are then presented by the general media simply quoting the social media source. The individual targeted normally fights a losing battle endeavoring to address the issue through social media, being judged guilty before having an opportunity to defend themselves against the accusations. We are beginning to witness some of these personal attacks referencing situations which go back 20 and 30 years, and yet when proved doubtful or incorrect the perpetrator of the statements in spite of the huge amount of both personal and business damage caused is not held to task by the legal apparatus.
So how does a business manage such a situation when a senior staff member or director is directly attacked via social media in such a manner as to have a direct effect on the businesses' reputation and thus a negative effect on its performance? The first thing is to take control of the situation by immediately appointing an outside independent counsel to investigate the situation and communicate this appointment to the general public at large, including the social media. In serious accusations against an individual it is preferable to appoint two independent counsels to undertake the investigation. The brief for the counsel should be kept simple but include inviting the social media perpetrator to present their facts. Keep the individual being attacked within your business advised at all times of your actions. Do not under any circumstances stand the individual down from their everyday responsibilities or activities within the company as perception will read into this action regardless of how it might be spun as a sign of guilt. Put a very short time fame on the independent counsel's investigation as it's important that an initial line be drawn under the investigation as soon as possible. If the counsel's report finds there is no case to answer, then the business should go on the attack with its findings in the media. On the other hand, if the counsel's report shows even the slightest possibility of misconduct verifying the social media accusation, then actions appropriate to the offense should be taken and communicated to the public at large.
The problem with social media attacks such as are being addressed in this chapter is that the indisputable right of an individual to be innocent until proved guilty is turned upside down as via social media they are judged guilty and have to prove their innocence. This is where the business if at all possible must take control of the situation and manage the process in order not only to protect its own reputation and demonstrate to all and sundry its mature and professional behavior but to equally demonstrate to its own staff a concern for their welfare.
An Attack on the Board as a Collective
It is very rare for an entire board of directors to be attacked via social media and in such instances there is usually some justification for the social media comments being made. In most cases the dissatisfaction expressed by the protagonists relates to the board's behavior in managing and directing the company.
There are two courses of action that boards can take in such circumstances. One option is to take a firm stand and fight the accusations but in doing so be aware of the damage such an action may have on the business's performance and before actually embarking on this course of action make sure you have the support of the major shareholders. It has to be said that this is a high-risk option as confronting protagonists via social and other media simply fuels public debate and is a long and painful process which regardless of the rights and wrongs of the situation will damage the business's reputation and thus its performance. Adopt this option with extreme caution.
The second option is to call an extraordinary shareholders meeting with the sole objective being to address the issues involved and obtain shareholders' support. Such an option needs to be signaled to the market and carefully planned to ensure the right outcome. If managed with a great deal of care, the board will be in a far stronger position to then revert in part to the option-one strategy. Of course the aforementioned options are predicated on the board being convinced that they have the high ground and are morally correct in the manner in which they have governed and led the business. If there is any doubt at all that the social media accusations have merit, then the board collectively should resign, a shareholders meeting called, and a new board elected (with perhaps some existing directors reappointed) to guide the company into the future. In most cases social media attacks on the board as a collective are initiated by disenchanted shareholders but the same options for managing the situation apply.
Conclusion
Of course, there are numerous other types of social media attacks that businesses have to contend with but the above examples are simply guidelines which can be morphed and shaped within reason to suit each situation. However, one truism is that social media will continue in the near future to exert both positive and negative influences on the social fabric of our communities and as such will also influence how businesses behave both in public and within the marketplace. Managing social media is going to be the new challenge facing most businesses, be they large or small. The major problem in addressing the social media issues is that as a communication vehicle it is unrestrained and comments made can become, once circulated, accepted as the truth with no balanced recourse or informed discussion.
The recent U.S. senate hearings associated with Brett Kavanaugh's appointment to the U.S. Supreme Court produced an absolute frenzy of social media comment with almost all posts lacking any proven facts. The rise of the “Me Too” movement portrayed a large number of individuals guilty without any recourse to a balanced response. A small doll manufacturing business was forced to close its doors as the result of a violent social media response to the fact that they for years had included a Golly Wog doll in their offering. A major company was forced to change its TV advertising campaign as social media deemed the presentation to be sexist. And so the list goes on, simply proving that businesses today cannot afford to dismiss social media as a passing irritant but must embrace the need to prepare for negative attacks via this communication vehicle while at the same time using social media to generate new markets and grow their business opportunities. You'll note I've not used the word corporate to any great extent in this chapter but referenced my remarks with the word business. This has been on purpose as social media can be equally damaging to small enterprises as much as to large corporate bodies.
When addressing this issue with various boards and individual directors I have been challenged as to why the processes I have outlined need to be included in the governance document rather than detailed as a board operation protocol. The answer is really simple. Almost all social media attacks relate in some way or form to the business's behavior and professional ethics. The business's Governance Charter is the document that underpins and shapes the behavior of the enterprise and its staff and thus high-level social media processes which influence behavior need to be included in this document.
I trust you have enjoyed reading this chapter and it's given you food for thought. Obviously not everyone will agree with some of my comments but that is a positive in that at least the issue of managing social media issues will be discussed and debated. I am sure that as in the past businesses today regardless of size or shape will face the new challenges that social media brings and continue to prosper.
Go well and may the force of positive thinking be with you and guide your everyday thoughts and actions.
Appendixes
About the Author
Drew Stein is a semi-retired professional chairman and director having served on numerous international and local boards. In addition his experience includes a number of high-profile managing director and CEO roles in various countries including his home country New Zealand. His recent interests have been focused on the broader issues associated with corporate governance and general business practices having authored a book Corporate Musings as well as publishing numerous articles on these subjects. More recently he has become an advocate for expanding and strengthening corporate governance principles to address the issues surrounding the danger social media and the Internet can pose to the business community in general. He has recently stated that “for any business to survive and grow in the current business environment it needs to manage its social media communication via strong governance rules and disciplines. Not only does this include addressing the opportunities for expanding the business via focused use of the Internet but equally importantly it needs to have strong governance rules around defending the business from the downside effects of malicious and anonymous social media attacks.”
Although semi-retired, Drew still undertakes specific assignments advising boards on governance issues as well as accepting guest speaker assignments. He lives in a rural setting in New Zealand maintaining his farming interest being an interbred cattle judge at numerous shows throughout the country.