Tag Archives: ethics

July 22, 2013 · 8:48 am

Liar Liar

The phone rang the other day and it was someone asking me for more information about the services I can provide. That’s not really unusual. Sometimes they’ve read the screed, sometimes they’ve seen my business website, or sometimes something from a past life – an article, and interview, or another client – will send them my way.  I’m thankful for those calls – some turn into business and each is an opportunity to learn about another perspective on the business world.

The call I got the other afternoon was much like many of the others.  It was someone  – Mary was what she said her name was – who had seen my site and wanted to know more about how I could help them.   I asked about their business and they said they were selling shoes.  We chatted about the differences between selling online and offline, about website optimization, content creation, and analytics.  It was a pretty typical chat and it went on for 10 minutes or so.  Typical, that is, until “Mary” came clean:

So we’re a marketing company too and I’m wondering if maybe we can work together because our services would fit well with the ones you offer.

My response was about what you might expect.  Yes I do on occasion team up with businesses that offer services that I don’t but no, I can’t work with anyone who begins our relationship with a lie.  Then, I hung up.  But it got me thinking about how many businesses do just that – sometimes without malice, sometimes on purpose.  We engage with potential customers under false pretenses, promising to solve their problems when our primary motivation is self-enrichment.  We might think a little hyperbole is OK as we’re selling and maybe it is.  But lies aren’t.

In this case, I don’t have a clue what this woman was thinking.  Why would anyone want to continue the dialog after you come clean?  But it’s a great example of what NOT to do.   Do you think I’m being unfair?

Enhanced by Zemanta

Leave a comment

Filed under Reality checks, Thinking Aloud

Tagged as , , , , ,

July 3, 2013 · 1:48 pm

Reaping What You Sow

A heavy topic for midweek, kids, but today it’s karma or, in less religious terms, what goes around comes around (such a child of the 60’s, I know).  What has me on this topic are a couple of things that came out during the last week and I want to bring them to your attention.  Both have some strong implications to anyone who uses the web (and obviously, since you’re reading this, you’re included).  In a sense, there’s a third thing – the whole PRISM program from the NSA – but since we don’t do politics, and that program can’t really be discussed without politics entering the discussion, I’m going to table it.  I will say, however, that if you’re angry about it now, where were you a dozen years ago when it all began?

That’s sort of the point I want to make about the other two topics.  The first are the “shadow” profiles Facebook has been gathering.  It came out that a bug on Facebook exposed user data for 6 million folks.  Moreover, the data it exposed proved that Facebook has been putting together profiles of everyone, even people not on Facebook, and the information contained in those dossiers has not been offered up to Facebook – they just found it.  The company that exposed it – Packet Storm – asked:

would Facebook ever commit to automatically discarding information of individuals that do not have a known Facebook account? Possibly age it out X days if they don’t respond to an invite due to a friend uploading their information without their knowledge?

Their response was essentially that they think of contacts imported by a user as the user’s data and they are allowed to do with it what they want. To clarify, it’s not your data, it’s your friends. We went on to ask them if Facebook would commit to having a privacy setting that dictates Facebook will automatically delete any and all data uploaded about me via third parties (“friends”) if it’s not in scope with what I’ve shared on my profile (and by proxy, is out-of-band from my privacy settings)?

We were basically met with the same reasoning as above and in their wording they actually went as far as claiming that it would be a freedom of speech violation.

Let’s repeat that:  it’s not your data.  The solution proposed?  Governmental intervention.  Frankly, I prefer the solution contained in the other topic of the day – the Cookie Clearinghouse being developed by the folks at Stanford.  I encourage you to click through here to see how it works.  It won’t solve the “bad actor” situation that we see in the Facebook example but since it’s designed  to enable browser developers to block third-party cookies — such as those set by ad networks — without also inadvertently blocking cookies from companies that have relationships with consumers, it’s a start.  The ad networks and others are not happy about any blocking and are doing their damnedest to stop it, but I think it’s pretty obvious that privacy is(finally) front and center for even casual users.

Sorry for the length today but the point is simple:  we reap what we sow.  If we’re bad actors when it comes to invading people’s privacy, the odds are that some legislated solution will arrive on your doorstep and it won’t be as simple as just doing the right thing you should have done in the first place.  Witness COPPA and CanSpam, brought about because the bad stuff came back around to haunt not only the perpetrators, but the legitimate companies that tried to behave as if it were their own data and their family’s data being taken.

Are you aware of this?  What do you think?

Enhanced by Zemanta

Leave a comment

Filed under digital media

Tagged as , , , , ,

June 13, 2013 · 10:12 am

Appearances Matter

I made myself a note to write about a common business situation that can cause a lot of grief if not handled in a smart manner.  Unfortunately, what prompted the note was a situation which was not handled the right way.  I’m talking about conflict of interest and how appearances really do matter.Dunce_cap_from_LOC_3c04163u

When I was in my corporate jobs from time to time I was offered “insider” pricing on some pending IPO‘s.  I was also invited to serve on advisory boards.  These offers came from start-up companies that were looking to do business with my employer and I was under no delusion that the offers were being extended because of my wit and charm or youthful good looks.  I hesitate to use the word “bribe” but I understood that it was possible someone looking at this might think that my loyalty might be by divided – business interest vs. self-interest.

What raises this is a report on a major ad agency CEO being granted stock options in a company that is a vendor to her agency.  These options might be worth as much at $3,000,000 if a planned IPO goes through.  Digiday makes the exact point:

In its S-1 filing, Tremor says any conflicts of interest related to Desmond are and will continue to be avoided because she’s “recused herself from all negotiations” with the company. While it’s unlikely Desmond regularly writes media plans for SMG’s clients, the fact remains she oversees a business that spends millions of dollars with a company she has a financial interest in.

I know from personal experience that even when your boss tells you to ignore his relationships with a vendor it’s hard when you know there’s a friendship or familial relationship.  When those relationships are more than personal friendships and extend into financial dealings, it’s impossible.

Appearances matter.  In this age, one can assume any relationship will come out and be widely known.  Any competitive vendor losing some of the agency’s business will have grounds to cry foul.  Tremor (the vendor involved) will have grounds to scream if the CEO (and now board member) doesn’t live up to her fiduciary responsibilities  It’s a bad, easily avoidable situation for everyone.  Hopefully you’re smarter than this.  Right?

Enhanced by Zemanta

Leave a comment

Filed under Helpful Hints, Reality checks

Tagged as , ,