Like many people, I’ve been watching the Gary Lineker / BBC controversy of the past week with some dismay.
I’m not in this blog going to wade into the rights and wrongs of what Lineker wrote, nor of the Government policy which prompted it. The whole saga has gotten pulled into the culture wars between left and right, and that’s a shame because the politics have largely overshadowed the more complex issues which lie beneath. Strip out the political noise and posturing, the endless attempts at interpreting and contextualising what Lineker wrote and meant, and what’s left is a cautionary tale of how one person’s determination to speak with their authentic voice on social media can conflict with an employer’s need for discretion.
The BBC has lengthy guidelines for employees and freelance staff, including on social media, which can be found here. In fact, it has multiple pieces of guidance. The core document of interest when it comes to the Lineker issue, is the guidance on individual use of social media, which was last updated in October 2020; another, on the use of BBC branded accounts, was updated a month later. In addition, it has separate guidelines on impartiality, also updated in October 2020, plus supplementary guidelines on impartiality and racism, and impartiality is mentioned again in the BBC’s Royal Charter. There are also individual contracts to consider, the details of which are not in the public domain.
Gary Lineker is neither a news journalist nor a political presenter. Nor is he a member of BBC staff. He’s a freelancer, paid to present on sports, and you might think that meant – and he argues – that his political opinions are nobody’s business but his own. And indeed, section 3 of the guidance stipulates that the rule on not expressing a personal opinion on matters of public policy, politics, or what it calls “controversial subjects” applies “if your work requires you to maintain your impartiality, i.e. if you are working in news and current affairs (across all Divisions) and factual journalism production or senior management.”
But not so fast. The Introduction to those same guidelines says; “There are also others who are not journalists or involved in factual programming who nevertheless have an additional responsibility to the BBC because of their profile on the BBC. We expect these individuals to avoid taking sides on party political issues or political controversies and to take care when addressing public policy matters.” [my italics] In other words, the situation is not clear-cut.
Also coming under scrutiny is whether the BBC has been consistent in applying its own rules. After the Lineker story broke, the Telegraph published a list of other BBC figures it could be argued had broken the corporation’s impartiality guidelines. They include Lord Alan Sugar, Baroness Karen Brady, Richard Osman, Dame Mary Berry, Nadiya Hussain, Gabby Logan, Chris Packham and even Brian Cox. Unlikely bedfellows, you might think, and the list’s publication was greeted with the usual chorus of opinion on social media, as well as suggestions that to it should be added names such as Andrew Neil, Neil Oliver and others.
The Telegraph’s publication of the list, and the reaction to it, underscores the point that it’s not always clear where the line should be, is being, drawn. In a statement on Monday, Director-General Tim Davie acknowledged that there were “grey areas” in the guidelines. He went on to say that the guidelines will be subject to an independent review and that Lineker had agreed in the meantime to abide by the existing guidelines.
The BBC is in an unenviable position but it’s not the only organisation that’s been wrestling of late with what constitutes an appropriate use of social media. The Charity Commission has been thinking about the issue for its sector as a whole. Just this week it finished consulting on draft guidance for trustees.
As you might expect, the guidance talks about charities setting out in policy their use of social media – what platforms, how managed, by whom, for what purposes used and so forth. Particularly resonant with the matter at hand, though, is section 2.2 which draws attention to the responsibility of trustees to identify and manage the risks associated with problematic content posted or shared by anyone connected to the charity. That includes a trustee, employee or volunteer posting content i) using a personal account through which they can be associated with the charity, be that because they mix personal with professional content and/or list their workplace or role in their profile; or ii) using a wholly personal account that could [nonetheless] reasonably be linked to their role at the charity.
It's good advice succinctly written, and it serves as a reminder that organisations of all shapes and sizes need to get a grip on what does and does not constitute risk when it comes to social media usage, and where the limits of a professional association might be drawn.
This, I think, is the crux of the matter and why some organisations are handling the issue well while others are finding it a challenge. Many of us in our social media use don’t have a rigid separation between personal and professional selves, but then, we’re not famous, our followers number in the hundreds or low thousands, not the millions, and the distinction between the two perhaps doesn’t matter so much. We tend to wear our employer’s name and job titles in our profiles as a sign of our credentials, and frequently blur the line between commenting on issues because they’re of direct relevance professionally, commenting because we’re interested, or feeling compelled to share our opinions with others.
In the case of Gary Lineker, footballing hero turned pundit turned presenter-cum-media personality, it’s not at all clear where his different identities begin and end and how that should shape his social media use.
10-Point Roadmap
If the controversies about Gary Lineker, his use of social media and his relationship with the BBC tell us one thing, it's that effective social media usage isn’t a one-stop ride, it’s a journey. There will be twists and turns and bumps along the way, the landscape will be constantly shifting and changing, and there may be a few unplanned-for detours.
Here’s the We Grow By Learning 10-Point Roadmap for navigating the world of social media and the relationship between organisational and employee presence.
Ask yourself: why bother? Think seriously about whether you want a presence on social media, which channels you want to use, and most importantly – why? Is it to promote the work you do? Is it to sell your business’ products and services? Is it to engage in public debates? Or is it for some other reason? Have a clear rationale for building a presence on social media, don’t just do it because everyone else is.
Understand the relationship between personal and professional. Think carefully about whether people in your business and already have a presence on social media are talking about your business – and if so, are they doing it in a professional capacity or a personal one? Some people blend the two, and while that does look “authentic”, more interesting and human, developing case law means it can get complicated. For many people, it may be easier to choose one or the other and stick to it.
Be specific about what – and who – is in scope. Don’t assume things are "common sense", think carefully about what it is you don't want your people doing on social media, either on an organisational account or a personal one. The kinds of content you might want to include as prohibited could include posts that disparage the organisation and its staff, its clients or competitors, personal opinions given on political or social causes, or content that is extreme, sexually or violently explicit, or openly discriminatory.
Remember the Do’s, not just the Don’ts. The flipside to the previous point, don’t just think about what your people can’t do on social media, think also about what they can do and should do. A “no surprises” approach means people know what actions may arise from particular situations or events, and what may be done when things go wrong. Above all, avoid ownership creep, when a personal account bit by bit it becomes an organisational one and something happens you haven’t anticipated.
Think security and safety. How will your employees avoid being stalked or abused on social media? What if you or they received hatred or abuse after posting online – even after posting something innocuous? Security consultants will tell you, if you post a picture of your front door online, people can start looking to find its location. Some, in fact, do, with little difficulty, and they may act on that.
Prepare for things to go wrong sometimes. Things can very quickly go south on social media – people pile on one of your tweets, you or your employees get a torrent of hatred or abuse, someone uses your account to post content that’s contrary to your values, or even illegal. Develop a policy which anticipates when things go wrong, and what actions to take when they do. Think through and practice a “meltdown” scenario – what do you do, especially out of hours? You may never find yourself in that situation, but being prepared in case you do is crucial.
Have it covered. Develop a policy which covers key employment situations. At a minimum, this should include the need to distinguish between personal and organisational presence, what social media actions in someone’s personal life can impact on their employment – and how. Otherwise, you may find employees contesting disciplinary or dismissal decisions through employment tribunals. This area needs careful HR advice, to ensure you act fairly and lawfully.
Place it in context. A good policy should also exist in the context of other, established HR rules around confidentiality and codes of conduct. Employers typically prohibit employees from sharing confidential information or trade secrets, and this should be true regardless of the channel used. Likewise, people should be unable to use social media to violate laws on IP, data protection or privacy, or to harass colleagues. What applies to business conduct generally should also apply to communications on social media.
Make sure you have buy-in. Be realistic, keep your guidelines practicable – and don’t assume that publication means instant buy-in. You should think carefully about whether your guidelines are going to work in practice, and that all parties who are brought within scope are genuinely bought into them. And think seriously about how far you’re prepared to go to enforce them; when people feel the rules are there to be broken, the temptation is strong.
Socialise, review and improve. You should consult on your policy with your staff, trades unions and others, and ensure HR are very clear on the current case law on social media and what actions employers can take in the event of an incident. The more minds and eyes there are on it in the drafting, the better the final policy will be. And once it’s been published, don’t sit back and think, job done. Social media technology and practice are fast moving areas so don’t “back burner” your policy, keep it under regular review and be prepared to make changes.
The 10-Point Roadmap is copyright We Grow By Learning, 2023.
Comments