22. Thank you!
Ronald L. Hicks, Jr.
Meyer, Unkovic & Scott LLP
Henry W. Oliver Building
535 Smithfield Street, Suite 1300
Pittsburgh, PA 15222
412.456.2800
www.muslaw.com
Editor's Notes
In a 2011 survey conducted by Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM), 68% of organizations reported currently engaging in social media activities to reach external audiences such as potential customers. [3] 93% of marketers use social media for business. [4][3] SHRM Research Spotlight: Social Media in the Workplace, November 2011, available at: http://www.shrm.org/Research/SurveyFindings/Documents/Part%203_Social_Networking_Media_Flier_FINAL.pdf.[4] 2011 Social Media Marketing Industry Report, available at: http://www.socialmediaexaminer.com/social-media-marketing-industry-report-2011/.
In a 2011 survey reported by The Next Web, 44% of the companies surveyed said that they had policies in place for use of social media that covered use both in and out of the workplace. More interestingly,70.7% of those respondentsclaimed that they actively blocked social networks in the workplace. The Next Web, Social Media in the Workplace, August 17, 2011, available at: http://thenextweb.com/socialmedia/2011/08/17/44-of-companies-track-employees-social-media-use-in-and-out-of-the-office/.
The Kit Kat bar maker, Nestle, has long been the target of Greenpeace which has objected to the candy maker’s use of palm oil. According to Greenpeace, the palm oil that Nestle uses allegedly comes from companies that are “trashing Indonesian rainforests ... and pushing orangutans towards extinction.” In 2010, Greenpeace uploaded a YouTube video depicting an office worker opening a Kit Kat wrapper, pulling out an orangutan finger, and letting blood drip on his face and computer. The group then said that Nestle had asked YouTube to remove the video, citing copyright violations. Greenpeace asked its supporters to swarm Nestle's Facebook page and change their profile pictures to altered anti-Nestle logos, like "Killer" instead of "Kit Kat." Not to be bullied by Greenpeace’s tactic, Nestle’s social media representative began posting multiple iterations of a warning: "We welcome your comments, but please don't post using an altered version of any of our logos as your profile pic -- they will be deleted." Those warning inflamed even more Facebook users, who joined the pile-on -- while the Nestle rep devolved into snark and derision. Nestle's official replies included "Thanks for the lesson in manners. Consider yourself embraced" and "Oh please .. it's like we're censoring everything to allow only positive comments." Several hours later, the Nestle rep finally backed down, by posting the following message: "This was one in a series of mistakes for which I would like to apologise. And for being rude. We've stopped deleting posts, and I have stopped being rude." Two months later, Greenpeace declared "mission accomplished" when Nestle agreed to end its palm oil contract with a specific company.
