Over the past few weeks, FINRA has tweaked their rule on social media communications. You can read more about that in this post from the Socialware blog. One point to mention, though, is that the FINRA rule shaved down its six catergories for social media communications from firms, to three. Simplified as it is, how much credence does it really have when you wind up in court?
In our last two blog posts, we talked about how ESI metadata is now required in court and that incriminating tweets have also shown up in recent court cases. At Hanzo, we archive social media communications for many of our clients, who are concerned with compliance and eDiscovery challenges. But, we also wonder if all this attention being placed on social media means many companies are dancing around the elephant in the room.
While implementing social media archiving into an overall social media plan is a wise choice, what of the rest of your web presence? Everyone knows that social media platforms are used to drive traffic to websites or attract consumers to the Facebook page of a brand and then to a shopping experience on a website, social media communications isn’t all that’s called into question for regulatory compliance. There are also cases, like the example in this post, of terms and conditions falling prey to merger and aquistion mistakes.
In the instances of cultural heritage preservation, social media communications only tell a fraction of a brand’s history and personality. Think for a minute how comfortable you are with future generations only knowing your brand history from social media perspective.
As the business masses continue their rapid migration to the cloud, web and social media archiving is becoming more essential than ever, for a number of reasons. eDiscovery and information management currently top the list.