Please don't Tweet me, it might cost me everything!

Are attempts to control social media getting - well - out of control?

Is it reasonable for any party to believe they can dictate the lexicon in conversations around any given topic?

What about punishment? How exactly should perpetrators who stray outside of the rules be dealt with?

Clearly, when it comes to topics around hate, racism, misogyny or generally behaving like a d**k then clearly there are needs for a level of policing. Freedom of speech is one thing, freedom of the consequences of saying what you do, are another.

But this isn’t the topic of my piece here, and I’m talking about attempts to control and punish perpetrators around something much more benign.

Something which will be filling much of our concious in the coming weeks.

An Olympic story...

Picture the scene if you will. The date is sometime in mid-August 2016, and Jessica Ennis-Hill has just successfully defended her Olympic Heptathlon title, picking up the Gold medal with a record beating points total.

As she crossed the line thousands in the stadium erupt snapping the scene on their smartphones sharing the moment across Twitter, Instagram, Facebook etc.

It’s all smiles on the track as she completes a lap of honour draped in a Union Jack, and joyful tears as she addresses the press corps who beam her first reactions back to an audience of millions at home in the UK, glued to their TVs and smartphones.

Similar to those in the stadium, thousands take to Twitter, posting their reactions to one of the sport's great moments. 

Deep in the bowels of the Olympic Committee headquarters, a crack team of social media community managers, strategists, and data analytics sit in their war room monitoring the pulse of the conversation.

There’s much whooping, hollering and backslapping going on. Not for the sporting achievement that has taken the individual a lifetime of dedication and training to achieve; but for the fact the official tweet count for the games just passed 100m. After all, anyone who works in social media knows that the only thing that really matters is how many likes and retweets one gets.

Then, the hashtag #JessicaDidIt starts to trend.

The new trending topic doesn’t go unnoticed and a member of the team is assigned to keep a close eye on it. This could become a problem. It’s not an official hashtag and people really shouldn’t be using it.

And then, this tweet happens.

The teenage daughter of Bill - the proprietor of the Fish & Chip shop in Jessica’s home town of Dore - who manages the twitter account for her dad, got caught up in the emotion of the moment and published a simple congratulatory message.

A few local people retweet the message, one even loops in Jessica’s Twitter handle.

All completely innocuous right? Nothing wrong in this whatsoever.

Perfeclty normal. 

Well, you would think so wouldn’t you!

Astonishingly this isn’t the case and this simple tweet set off an alarming chain of events.

Within moments of the tweet being published, the community manager assigned to monitor #JessicaDidIt notices the post and identifies it as coming from an account which he or she believe is a commercial entity. In which case they quickly search for Bill’s Plaice in the database of approved brands who have paid for the privilege of sharing their feelings on Olympic events.

The search comes back empty. Bill’s place isn’t on the list.

This could be a problem.

An email is fired off to the line manager, who verifies the details and escalates the offence up the chain.

The issue goes all the way to the top where Olympic Chief Marketing Officer Lisa Baird is furious. She is literally spitting blood

“How dare this restaurant do this. How dare they flagrantly abuse the rules. They’re not the official fish & chip supplier to the Rio Olympics.

This is disgraceful behaviour. Somebody must pay. I demand somebody's head on a plate for this”

Then, just to pour oil on the fire; Jessica who is now back in the locker rooms having finished all her media obligations has taken to Twitter to thank her followers for their messages of support.

She see’s the tweet from Bill’s Plaice, and quotes their message - adding her own supporting comment about looking forward to a meal of cod and chips with mushy peas on her return to the UK.

This additional engagement has Lisa Baird fuming. Steam is quite literally blowing out of her ears. Objects are being thrown around her temporary office in the media centre at the Olympic stadium.  Unpaid interns are ducking for cover to avoid flying staplers and other stationery items*

*all provided by Stapples the official Olympic brand partner for office equipment 

She picks up the phone and makes a call.

A couple of hours later, moments before Jessica is about to re enter the stadium for the medal ceremony, she is called into a side room by a nameless Olympic official

“There’s a problem I’m afraid Jessica. We can’t award you your gold medal. I’m sad to say you’ve been stripped of your title”

Jessica is almost speechless.

“What for? Was there a problem with my urne test. Have I failed it? Are you accusing me of doping?”

The Olympic official shifts awkwardly.

“No no no, that was all fine. You’re a clean athlete.

I’m afraid the problem is related to a tweet posted by somebody called BIll’s Plaice. 

Have you heard of them?

They’re not the official Fish & Chip sponsor to the Rio Olympics so I'm afraid you were in clear breach of rule 40 when you engaged with them”

Then it hits her…

There really will be no Gold medal - and all because of a not-so-innocent tweet

Not all stories have a happy ending

Ok, the scenario I’m painting here is somewhat extreme, and I’ve embellished details for the sake of narrative - but - the reality is that just such an instance could occur.

The Olympic Committee want to so tightly regulate how athletes and brands engage on social platforms they insisting on rules allowing them to punish offenders severely. It seems they’ll give equal punishment to a social media slip-up as they would a drugs cheat, doping on a banned substance to gain competitive advantage.

Let that sink in for a moment.

They believe they have the right to strip a medal from an athlete simply because an unauthorised commercial entity has attempted to take advantage of the Olympic brand. Regardless of whether or not the athlete has any official relationship with said entity.

They’ll care little for how it will make them look in the eyes of the world, and the ridicule just such an action would trigger from the world’s media. For them, protecting the investment from sponsors is all that matters.

At their core, these are regulations designed to counter ‘ambush marketing’, and put in place means to protect revenue that should rightly be directed through official channels to athletes themselves or local sporting federations.  

But there is a point to which ruling has to be deemed overly zealous, and the so-called "Rule 40" seems to have jumped headlong over this line, and descended into a farce.

Take for example some of the terms supposedly considered to be Olympic themed and therefore banned -effort, Challenge, Summer, Victory to name but a few.

Good luck to them trying to police that !

Which brings me to my conclusion. Yes, controls are needed,  after all, it can't be a complete free-for-all. But - and here’s my point - there is a line which if you step over you can create so much needless work for yourself policing that you not only waste money but also ultimately devalue the product you’re working so hard to protect.

Olympic athletes in any sport have enough worries to contend with around the competition without adding to them with weighty bureaucracy around how they - or others - use Twitter. Competitive sport is tough enough without having to contend with needless regulations.

There is a very real feeling here that in the raw pursuit of profits, those charged with running the games ( and much like other sports *cough* FIFA *cough* ) risk damaging their own product beyond repair.

Now of course - should Bill’s Place have invested $200m in being the official Fish & Chip sponsor to the Rio Olympics then my story would be completely mute. A lucrative as the UK’s most traditional take out food is, I’m not sure there are many outlets in the UK with that kind of cash tucked away with the sacks of potatoes of batter mix.