by Daniel Farey-Jones & Darren Davidson,
Brand Republic
06-Aug-07, 09:30
A spokeswoman for the COI confirmed the government body has decided to withdraw advertising from Facebook, joining Virgin Media, Halifax, the Prudential and the AA in the list of brands who are boycotting the site.
However, it is not only Facebook that has been hit by the COI move but MySpace and other social networking sites as well.
Last week, Vodafone and First Direct have pulled their ads from Facebook after they were placed on the British National Party's profile page.
Vodafone is seeking talks with Facebook to ensure that if it places ads on the site again, they will not appear on the political party's page.
Both clients have said that Facebook does not allow them any control over where their ads will appear on its site.
According to a Vodafone spokeswoman, the company's public policy principles state it does not make political donations or support particular party political interests.
She said: "Therefore to avoid misunderstandings we immediately withdrew our advertising as soon as this was brought to our attention.
"We are working with our media buyer OMD to ensure that more robust controls are in place before we agree to any potential re-investment."
A First Direct spokesman said it aimed "to make sure that the places that our adverts appear are consistent with our values" and it is also reviewing its advertising on other social networking sites "for the same reasons". Its media buying agency is MindShare.
Advertisers which appeared on the BNP page today included Hotels.com and Monster.co.uk.
Facebook was unavailable for comment.
Comments
No one said that "cool" (if you beleive that Facebook is cool) came without risk... did they? Facebook is "cool" because of it's community, by definition this makes it a function of all elements of its community. Sensor the community and it becomes a nanny site and by definition uncool. The BNP may be vile but unfortunately there are many colours in the palette that make up society. If you want to paint in technicolour you have to use all of them, just in varying degrees. Fortunately The BNP is a very small element of that spectrum and would represent (eventually) that when the broad range of society are members. The danger is that until it becomes a staple fo communication it will be easier for extreme groups to have a larger voice than it would normally. That's fad,fashion and cool for you. It's not margerine it's flares in the 90's and mullets in the eighties. In hindsight some looked good in hindsight others don't.
I was disturbed to see the other day a tramp taking drugs under a 48 sheet for a leading airline. Surely there is some way of removing these undesirables from near reputable advertising?
Yes, ok M BERTOZZI, we know you were 'disturbed to see the other day...'
MySpace is still the best.. =p
This is the ultimate risk of internet advertising, and not an issue that's likely to be resolved any time soon. If advertisers deem certain groups and parties to be distasteful, the same could be said of any kook on MySpace (or similar) supporting the KKK, Combat 18 etc. How is it possible to regulate people's individual thought processes?
Monster.co.uk have taken steps to remove all our advertising from Facebook with imeadiate effect.
RE M Bertozzi, there are many brands that cannot use OD to certain markets such as near schools for example. Fact is brands should have more faith in their customersto disseminate environment from message.
It's a problem for social networking sites certainly, not for content led sites like BR or ours.
Facebook could well feel the pinch because it's so easy to set up groups. I'd be interested to know what moderation policies they have in place.
As much as the BNP is a hideous thing. It is going on in society and advertisers who instantly start throwing their money at the social networks without properly scoping them out are a bit foolish. Its short sightedness (if thats a word?!) on their behalf because there is shit in this world and on a website where people make the content obviously shit is going to end up there. Its as obvious as Travoltas wig! If they couldnt see this coming they are tres foolish
What's great about this, and I believe what we need to focus on, is that there is now technology available that enables online advertisers to know where their ads have been placed, the story which Jennifer rightly mentioned was broken by NMA see:
www.nma.co.uk/Articles/34427/Vodafone+pulls+ads+from+Facebook.html
Whilst I acknowledge some of the comments, when ads are paid for, because this technology is now available, the brand owner will now want to ensure their placement next to UGC does not offend. How the site owners sell their ads in the future to combat this will sort the wheat from the chaff.
...and let's not forget that there are many other ways of engaging consumers within social networks outside of advertising - and ways that enable marketers to control the content their brand is aligned to. While social networks must evolve their offering to ensure brand owners can protect their equity, marketers must also evolve the way they engage digital consumers. Relying on an ad-led model simply isn't adequate...
Monitoring the way these social network sites are run, can lessen their 'in vogue' appeal. Facebook soared to popularity in a very short space of time. You Tube and other similar sites have been pilloried for showing such clips as 'happy-slapping' at it's most extreme.
These pitfalls will regularly be obstacles for any social network arena. It's up to the companies advertising to decide which ones they back and how bothered they are by 1 single 'undesirable' being associated with them.
As Alan Partridge would say "It's political correctness gone mad"
I assume that it was felt the viewing public would be unable to determine for themselves that the advertisements on a particular facebook page have nothing to do with the profile on that page? Just a hysterical overreaction i think.
When you place an ad (doesn't matter where), you ought to have a little idea of who you might address yourself to.
I just think that advertisers should know what they might risk in advance. It's unbelievable that such brands have so little idea how Facebook works...who are those incompetent media agencies???
I hope Facebook will get money out of that.
NMA? Is that still going? I used to read that and it was one of the dullest reads in the world. Literally Nytol of the trade press. I'm amazed it broke a story.
Where ads appear in relation to what used to be called 'editorial' does matter. Good for the COI, Vodafone and the rest for insisting on some control over where their material appears. Now we just need whoever is responsible for placing the Powergen 'Let the power of nature into your home' in news pages and magazines devoted to the devastating effects of climate change, and the genius who placed KFC (not once but multiple times) into Gordon Ramsey's 'The F-Word' to wake up to the fact that editorial impacts advertising.
Still, if there is little editorial information, you do not advertise on Facebook and then later say,” oh my god, we cannot thrust a media that puts our advertising in unexpected places". It's Facebook's choice to standardize its advertising offers. The advertiser should know that.
Facebook have taken the tags off the BNP page. I saw an ad for with Vodafone all over it on Saturday and Sunday for the Nokia 8600 Luna phone. I even have a screenshot ;-) So it seems they've come to a compromise....if that was the ad Vodafone yanked...?
c60 tapes, minidisc, dodo, 4 trak, facebook. Anyone see a pattern emerging?
NMA might have broken this story, but what the hell were they doing checking out the BNP party page?
I must admit, I chuckled slightly when I saw Sky TV advertised on the back of Private Eye last week....
Any company caught out by this cant complain - short sightedness is the culprit.
Comments
Simon Hamer - 03/08/2007
No one said that "cool" (if you beleive that Facebook is cool) came without risk... did they? Facebook is "cool" because of it's community, by definition this makes it a function of all elements of its community. Sensor the community and it becomes a nanny site and by definition uncool. The BNP may be vile but unfortunately there are many colours in the palette that make up society. If you want to paint in technicolour you have to use all of them, just in varying degrees. Fortunately The BNP is a very small element of that spectrum and would represent (eventually) that when the broad range of society are members. The danger is that until it becomes a staple fo communication it will be easier for extreme groups to have a larger voice than it would normally. That's fad,fashion and cool for you. It's not margerine it's flares in the 90's and mullets in the eighties. In hindsight some looked good in hindsight others don't.
M BERTOZZI - 03/08/2007
I was disturbed to see the other day a tramp taking drugs under a 48 sheet for a leading airline. Surely there is some way of removing these undesirables from near reputable advertising?
Fiona Berry - 03/08/2007
Yes, ok M BERTOZZI, we know you were 'disturbed to see the other day...'
Lee John Solda - 03/08/2007
MySpace is still the best.. =p
Alex Donohue - 03/08/2007
This is the ultimate risk of internet advertising, and not an issue that's likely to be resolved any time soon. If advertisers deem certain groups and parties to be distasteful, the same could be said of any kook on MySpace (or similar) supporting the KKK, Combat 18 etc. How is it possible to regulate people's individual thought processes?
David Henry - 03/08/2007
Monster.co.uk have taken steps to remove all our advertising from Facebook with imeadiate effect.
Simon Hamer - 03/08/2007
RE M Bertozzi, there are many brands that cannot use OD to certain markets such as near schools for example. Fact is brands should have more faith in their customersto disseminate environment from message.
Will Callaghan - 03/08/2007
It's a problem for social networking sites certainly, not for content led sites like BR or ours. Facebook could well feel the pinch because it's so easy to set up groups. I'd be interested to know what moderation policies they have in place.
Peter Petrelli - 03/08/2007
As much as the BNP is a hideous thing. It is going on in society and advertisers who instantly start throwing their money at the social networks without properly scoping them out are a bit foolish. Its short sightedness (if thats a word?!) on their behalf because there is shit in this world and on a website where people make the content obviously shit is going to end up there. Its as obvious as Travoltas wig! If they couldnt see this coming they are tres foolish
Simon Hamer - 03/08/2007
Travolta wears a wig?!
Lucy Long - 03/08/2007
What's great about this, and I believe what we need to focus on, is that there is now technology available that enables online advertisers to know where their ads have been placed, the story which Jennifer rightly mentioned was broken by NMA see: www.nma.co.uk/Articles/34427/Vodafone+pulls+ads+from+Facebook.html Whilst I acknowledge some of the comments, when ads are paid for, because this technology is now available, the brand owner will now want to ensure their placement next to UGC does not offend. How the site owners sell their ads in the future to combat this will sort the wheat from the chaff.
Peter Petrelli - 03/08/2007
Am I on NMA?
Ritch Sibthorpe - 06/08/2007
...and let's not forget that there are many other ways of engaging consumers within social networks outside of advertising - and ways that enable marketers to control the content their brand is aligned to. While social networks must evolve their offering to ensure brand owners can protect their equity, marketers must also evolve the way they engage digital consumers. Relying on an ad-led model simply isn't adequate...
Hannah Lines - 06/08/2007
Monitoring the way these social network sites are run, can lessen their 'in vogue' appeal. Facebook soared to popularity in a very short space of time. You Tube and other similar sites have been pilloried for showing such clips as 'happy-slapping' at it's most extreme. These pitfalls will regularly be obstacles for any social network arena. It's up to the companies advertising to decide which ones they back and how bothered they are by 1 single 'undesirable' being associated with them. As Alan Partridge would say "It's political correctness gone mad"
john o'regan - 06/08/2007
I assume that it was felt the viewing public would be unable to determine for themselves that the advertisements on a particular facebook page have nothing to do with the profile on that page? Just a hysterical overreaction i think.
Emilien Anglada - 06/08/2007
When you place an ad (doesn't matter where), you ought to have a little idea of who you might address yourself to. I just think that advertisers should know what they might risk in advance. It's unbelievable that such brands have so little idea how Facebook works...who are those incompetent media agencies??? I hope Facebook will get money out of that.
James Walters - 06/08/2007
NMA? Is that still going? I used to read that and it was one of the dullest reads in the world. Literally Nytol of the trade press. I'm amazed it broke a story.
BRIAN JACOBS - 06/08/2007
Where ads appear in relation to what used to be called 'editorial' does matter. Good for the COI, Vodafone and the rest for insisting on some control over where their material appears. Now we just need whoever is responsible for placing the Powergen 'Let the power of nature into your home' in news pages and magazines devoted to the devastating effects of climate change, and the genius who placed KFC (not once but multiple times) into Gordon Ramsey's 'The F-Word' to wake up to the fact that editorial impacts advertising.
Emilien Anglada - 06/08/2007
Still, if there is little editorial information, you do not advertise on Facebook and then later say,” oh my god, we cannot thrust a media that puts our advertising in unexpected places". It's Facebook's choice to standardize its advertising offers. The advertiser should know that.
Mel Carson - 06/08/2007
Facebook have taken the tags off the BNP page. I saw an ad for with Vodafone all over it on Saturday and Sunday for the Nokia 8600 Luna phone. I even have a screenshot ;-) So it seems they've come to a compromise....if that was the ad Vodafone yanked...?
Roy Murphy - 06/08/2007
c60 tapes, minidisc, dodo, 4 trak, facebook. Anyone see a pattern emerging?
Peter Petrelli - 06/08/2007
NMA might have broken this story, but what the hell were they doing checking out the BNP party page?
Damian Cassidy - 07/08/2007
I must admit, I chuckled slightly when I saw Sky TV advertised on the back of Private Eye last week....
Mani Bhatoa - 14/08/2007
Any company caught out by this cant complain - short sightedness is the culprit.