Permission wasn't generally asked in 1.0 marketing in the early days (spam and spyware didn't exist as we know it today at the big bang of hotmail - spam came later in the evolution) then at 1.5 a change happened 'permission based marketing' came in it came in after lots of complaints from customers about unwanted e-mail - permission based of marketing still happens today (it's when you agree to accept a newsletter or agree to let a social network use your photos) - then came along web 2.0 which is largely seen as the culture of sharing and trust - Ning, Facebook and Twitter are all example of permission based networks - where the network owners can use your photo for positive reasons.
When photo sharing goes bad (yes not all companies are nice I'm afraid)
An example I can give is in the dating scene - there is a negative practice (well known in marketing circles) of companies taking a persons image from one database and using it without permission on a number of other databases - they tell you it is for your benefit as they have millions of potential people that they can match you up with - Woow! you think - I'm gonna be everywhere.
What they are failing to tell you is that these databases aren't all the type you would like to be associated with (there is another agenda - they own some seedier databases that earn them a lot more money and they know people flock together - so for example if they fill it with pretty girls it attracts male customers)
From a consumer perspective - would you be happy for a widow to find a new love on-line and meet new people ? - I'm sure most people would say that's nice, the power of the Internet used for good things etc. - then how would you feel if you then found out that ladies photograph was going to be used in a way she had no idea of - plastered all over "adult" websites that cater to all kind of twisted fantasies by people of all age groups ?
If you are a person with ethics and follow any code of conduct - you might realize that this is a breach of permission based marketing - you'd not sign up your mother or sister for such a service would you ?. Hard sale marketers might say - they put their image on-line in the knowledge that it might be used (and abused) - hard luck, get over it - view it as a learning experience - move on already.
My argument would be that while celebrities, politician's and successful people are rightly or wrongly still classed as fair game - if you are going to use someone else's face for your own sales campaign and / or in a negative manner - you tell the person in advance that you plan to say something nasty about them, so they don't look like a rabbit that has just hit an electric fence - when they read about it over breakfast!
This is especially important in the 'trusting' medium that web 2.0 is - you are encouraged to share on trust which slightly bend around the 1.0 permission based marketing this doesn't mean you can use it for negative purposes - you are being allowed to handle a persons image in trust that they won't do anything nasty/un cool to it - not nail it to a dart board for people to take shots at it.- The darts might all hit the bulleye and logically make sense - but they don't save the perception (and possible reaction) of the giver if they are not warned that a person is running an ad campaign using their mug!
click on image to enlarge it:
No comments:
Post a Comment