Is it Google+...a little too much social?

I've just come accross this article, which little shocked me. 
Then I went to check terms and conditions about this brand-new social network and my concerns grew even more.


About privacy, about the data you're giving to Google in exchange ffor the use of its free tools.


First. Google+. Has it a breach?
As you probably know, Google+ organizes members and their connections to each other with “Circles.” This way you can post something to a specific Circle instead of the world at large. The issue seems to be that when you post something to a Circle, any receiving members can repost it with varying levels of privacy, up to and including “totally public.” Alright, so that’s a little disconcerting, but you should be able to turn reposting off, right? You can, but only after the post in question has been published — and you have to do it for each, individual post.

Second. Terms and conditions. They say: 

You retain copyright and any other rights you already hold in Content which you submit, post or display on or through, the Services. By submitting, posting or displaying the content you give Google a perpetual, irrevocable, worldwide, royalty-free, and non-exclusive license to reproduce, adapt, modify, translate, publish, publicly perform, publicly display and distribute any Content which you submit, post or display on or through, the Services. This license is for the sole purpose of enabling Google to display, distribute and promote the Services and may be revoked for certain Services as defined in the Additional Terms of those Services.

On the surface, it seems rather innocuous, intended merely to give Google permission to transmit your data across various networks onto all sorts of mobile devices. However, Google demands extremely broad rights from users. Under what circumstances would you sign a contract giving someone such free range with your intellectual property?


Plus, have a read at this really nice HBR article

Reputation in Financial Services

On the 29^th of June, I’ve been to a very interesting conference, “Reputation in Financial Services”, well organised by Communicate magazine.

I was quite curious to attend as financial services has been – after oil – the most battered sector in terms of trust, reputation…in a nutshell, credibility.

Even though the initial scepticism, I must say that the excellent quality of the speakers almost convinced me that something is changing in the way financial services now approach their customers. I mean, less cash cows and more human beings.

To whom speak about passions, values, love. It sounds cheesy but consider this: as the study by Uffindell pointed out, Apple has been able to create a relationship with their customers based on “love and passion”. 

Jillian Fransen, Barclays Bank

Banks, on the other side, are struggling to invite their customers for a “romantic dinner”. Financial sectors customers indeed seems to constantly looking for the best deal and for them is not really problematic to jump from one bank to another. Banks need to become “sexy & accountable”, and I have to say that banks, in this case, are the only entities to be blamed for this customers’ attitude.

ING was very inspirational: Adrian Simpson, Head of UK Corporate Comms at ING, has outlined the necessity to build a new paradigm in the sector, based on new values. 

Mike Tyrrell, SRI Connect

Banks and financial institutions need to start listening their customers and understanding their real needs and values in this current difficult contingency that the entire world is living. Banks have a responsibility in the community. ING seems to be pretty careful about this topic and his innovation about the use of social media is a clear testimonial.

Personally, I thought that Adrian’s commitment and enthusiasm to topic was pretty interesting to hear. It looked like the sector has started actively to look for new solutions in line with the most innovative consumer trends.

Mr Simpson has obviously underlined also the critical role of CSR as a tool to engage, internally and externally the stakeholders of his company. “ING has the responsibility to do good” has said. The vision he outlined for ING confirmed that acting responsibly would pay off not just in reputation but also in a greater satisfaction of employees that would be likely to be more productive. 

By looking back at Social Media, Adrian has suggested also their importance in their current CSR activities. “We love to speak to our public about our Social Commitment and we would like to engage them in our day by day results”.

Interesting indeed.

Interesting session has been also the one run by Rob Challis from Tangent Synergy about to what extent CSR can be useful to increase the corporate reputation level. Rob has underlined the importance for each company to understand the non-financial risk factors that could undermine corporate performance. 

A big thanks to Liz Foggitt, author of these great shots and to Alberto Campora for his indispensable contribution!