'Not a 10' tweet: Cautionary tale of how brands' messages can go wrong

The US State Department's Bureau of Consular Affairs often posts messages offering prospective travelers advice. But one tweet Wednesday that rated physical attractiveness prompted a backlash and an apology.

Dado Ruvic/Reuters/File
A 3D-printed logo for Twitter is seen in this picture illustration made in Zenica, Bosnia and Herzegovina on January 26. The State Department found itself facing a backlash on Wednesday after a tweet it sound out giving travel advice referenced rating travelers' physical attractiveness.

It hasn’t been a good week for brands and government agencies trying to seem young and hip on Twitter.

Just days after Microsoft pulled its Tay chatbot for spewing out a stream of racist and anti-Semitic messages, the US State Department found itself in a similar kerfuffle on Wednesday over a tweet that made reference to rating travelers’ physical attractiveness.

The State Department’s Bureau of Consular Affairs often sends out travel tips and advisories for Americans going abroad. But on Wednesday, one tweet read:

“Not a ’10’ in the US? Then not a 10 overseas. Beware of being lured into buying expensive drinks or worse — being robbed. #springbreakingbadly.”

(It has since been deleted).

But the department’s attempt at humor quickly drew a backlash, with many users on the social network deeming the tweet sexist and leading to a parody account mocking the State Department.

But the Bureau of Consular Affairs at first responded with a second attempt at the same theme that also prompted derision, this time referencing drug smuggling.

“Somebody offered you a free trip abroad, but the free luggage they offered is lined with cocaine. Beware of these scams #springbreakingbadly,” the State Department tweeted.

The incident mirrored a similar series of responses by the Oxford English Dictionary’s Twitter account, which had initially mocked a user’s concern that the dictionary’s example sentence for the word “rabid” which used the phrase “rabid feminist.”

An official from the publisher later apologized for the response. The phrase “was a poorly chosen example in that the controversial and impolitic nature of the example distracted from the dictionary’s aim of describing and clarifying meaning,” wrote Katherine Connor-Martin, head of content creation at the publisher, in a blog post.

Presidential candidate Donald Trump’s frequent use of Twitter – including a series of messages he has retweeted – have also drawn similar controversy and questions about whether some of his comments are misogynistic and racist.

The tone of many of his tweets has also inspired an MIT computer scientist to create a parody account, @DeepDrumpf, manned by a computer that has “learned” to tweet in Mr. Trump’s style through a training process. Some have also speculated that he doesn’t write many of his own tweets.

By Wednesday evening, the State Department’s account had recanted its earlier message and attempted to explain the original intent.

The balance between communicating in a way that engages a broad group of users online and avoiding missteps can be tricky, some say.

“When you try to be extra effective on social media and nab people’s attention, you can sometimes cross the line,” Gabe Saglie, the senior editor of Travelzoo, told the BBC.

“It’s a reminder for travel companies and government agencies," he added, "you have to be aware of your audience before you send a message."

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.