Should You Have One Social Media Identity, or Two?

I had a fascinating conversation about Facebook today with PRstore’s newest franchise owners and marketing consultants (store employees).

The new graduates of PRstore University asked me to explain the difference between Facebook company pages and fan pages. This spawned dozens of questions about how PRstore uses (could use? should use?) Facebook.

My favorite was this: “Should I have two separate Facebook accounts: one for my personal life and one for my work life?”

Huh. Good question.

Why Would Anyone Want Multiple Facebook Accounts?

Strictly speaking, Facebook doesn’t allow you to create multiple identities. There are ways around that, though.

But practically speaking, this is a dilemma. Some folks just don’t want their personal lives and work lives to mix. (“Worlds collide, Jerry!”) And there are privacy issues, too. Do you want a new client to follow the cookie crumbs to your teenage niece’s profile? Do you want a work colleague to watch videos you posted from your family picnic?

I used to put my networking activities into separate buckets. LinkedIn was for professional networking. Facebook was friends and family. Twitter was…what, people I’ve never met?

But the more active I became in social networking, the more I realized I couldn’t keep my life in buckets. I am me, wherever I go. I can’t turn parts of my identity on and off. More to the point, segmenting myself was slowing my ability to connect people with each other.

The Argument for a Single Social Media Identity

If you’re a business owner (or salesperson, or…whatever), your best clients may evolve into friends. Likewise, someone from your friends and family network may do double duty as a business contact — a future client, a supplier, an information source. Exclusing a trusted contact from one of your networks — and trusted is a key word here — decreases the power of your network.

Another reason I favor sticking with a single identity is that there’s a tendency to brand your second identity — your work identity — under the flag of your company. But you are not your company. You are a person. With rare exception, people want to connect with you. They don’t want to interact with your logo or your office building.

There’s no right or wrong way to craft a digital identity. Strategies change and evolve. Aaron Strout changed his Twitter handle from @astrout to @aaronstrout. PR man and 12for12k founder Danny Brown changed his from @PressReleasePR (his company name) to @DannyBrown. My PRstore colleague Lisa Hoffmann had to create @LisaHoffman (one “n”) because folks kept omitting the second “n”. Scott Monty, known ubiquitously as the social media voice of Ford, goes by his real name (@ScottMonty), while Ann Handley, a woman with personality in spades, uses company name instead (@MarketingProfs).

A Social Media Dilemma for Brands

Back to the question — what if someone wants to keep work and life separate? Should s/he create two Facebook accounts? Two Twitter handles?

For PRstore, this is brand integrity pickle. If a PRstore franchise owner wants to create a “work account” on Facebook (or elsewhere), should we let them use the brand as their identity? What are the advantages and disadvantages for the parent company, the franchise owner (individual), and other owners?

A corporate social media policy would help. Companies like Intel and the New York Times have them. PRstore is working on one, a process that involves learning from others.

Business owners, I put the question to you: How do you portray yourself in social media — as a person? A company? A person who owns a company? Something else? One account? Multiple accounts? How do your employs “brand” themselves? How much permission do they have to incorporate the company brand into their personal identities?

http://dannybrown.me Danny Brown

Great question, Scott, and not one that has a black and white answer.

As you mentioned, I changed my username on Twitter to @dannybrown from my previous one, which was my company. Cut long story short, I had wanted @dannybrown to start with but it was taken. I later learned it was a dead account so had Twitter release it for me, but if it had been available from the start I would have used it.

It is a personal brand thing, I believe – I use various analytical tools and I find that more clients/potential clients find me by searches for “danny brown pr” or “danny brown + social media”. I still get results from press release and PR agency searches, but my name seems to be coming up more now.

Is this a result of my clients beginning to talk about me more, or is it because people recall something I may have said on Twitter or a Facebook status message> Or Friendfeed discussions? So they recall my name and what I do, and that's where the searches come from?

I guess time will tell – but the fact that it's my name and not my company that's being primarily looked for tells me where my brand strengths lie and where I may need to improve.

With regards employees of a company, I do feel that as long as there are certain safeguards in place, then by all means use the brand identity as well. It helps build their authority (if the brand is respected, of course) and it offers the brand itself further outreach.

Love to see what others say, think you've opened up a great debate here. :)
http://riveting.rosie.reilman.com Rosie Reilman @rosebeezy

I personally just utilize privacy settings on Facebook. I don't let everyone see the family photos, etc. I've considered creating a second or separate Twitter account but for the reasons you mentioned, it just doesn't make sense. I am me wherever I go or whatever my screenname is.

I've seen a lot of talk about how your Twitter name should be your real name. But I think that it's different for everyone.

For work, I operate under @carolinajobs but my purpose for that account is to push links that might be helpful to job seekers. Or to use it as another means of notifying people of where jobs are in the Carolinas. I think it's about determining what you want from social media, and then deciding the best route – whether that means to use your name, a screenname, a company name, etc.

Good stuff to think about, Scott! I'm interested in seeing how others respond. :)
Agatha Kubalski

I definitely think that these days it's becoming much more difficult to have two separate identities. I've been torn between how I should be representing myself online, whether I should friend clients on Facebook, etc., but I truly believe that you should represent yourself as a real person online, and that means being a professional, having non-work-related interests and sometimes just offering up random thoughts and comments. It really is “all of the above.”

For example, with a company account on Twitter, who REALLY wants to hear ONLY work-related, “professional” comments all day long? You have to insert something personal and interesting to keep people engaged. Otherwise you sound like a non-human feed of official information. People want to interact with other people, and it just seems much more difficult to do that under the label of a company name, as opposed to your name.

Then again, perhaps being under the name of a company will force people to think a little more before adding content to the online community, and (hopefully) avoid some of these social media disasters.

On another note, it's interesting to think about the changing dynamic that will have to occur within companies – how much more faith companies will have to have in their employees, knowing that the face of a company is increasingly the face of its many employees. Talk about added pressure to ensure everyone on your team is someone you trust to represent your company! I wonder how social media will affect HR decisions, and increase the need to find people that are the right fit for your company.

@kubalski
PrimalMedia

Very relevant in these early days of social media, Scott. I sometimes wish someone would post an etiquette book for SM – we could all use it, I'm sure.

In the beginning, I kept the boundaries rigid: LinkedIn for professional, Facebook for friends, and Twitter had 2 accounts (one biz @primalmedia, one personal @CheriHegi). I've since let my clients in on Facebook and grown my Twitter handles to include non profit projects I'm involved in (@seacoastlocalnh, @heateat, @10percentshift, @10percentlocal).

I'm a big believer in keeping it PG. Since Google indexes Twitter aggressively, everything posted can be found online. Scary and yet thrilling at the same time. So while I share a lot, I try not to post anything I wouldn't want to see in an article about me someday. It's a very, very small world.

In fact, many of my friends have already become clients – or work for clients, or might become clients in the near future. You never know when a friend of a friend on Facebook will be staring you down across the desk, your proposal in their hands. Or if you'll be interviewing someone whose drunk antics you've seen plastered all over a connection's account on Facebook.
http://www.stephendill.com Stephen Dill

Scott, good question! I've been asking this of SM pros for a year and the answers have been all over the map. Marketing logic says to first ask what the desired results are. If the company wants to be found in organic search, and who doesn't, the cosmic Google juice of Twitter would push a brand or company name to the top in no time. If dialog with one or more representatives of the company serve the company's interests then there is the choice of the individual's name or a mix of both (@ComcastBill, for example). But many of the examples you cite, Scott Monty and Aaron Strout, for instance, have major SM reputations that are not immediately tied to the companies they work for. The transportability of their identities is a personal advantage, but my question is always, “What part of that helps people get to the company?” Anyone as an individual writing a blog can be easily associated with the entity hosting the blog, as communicated on the company site. But link that blog to FriendFeed, Facebook or LinkedIn and the company identity can be lost as the credit is directed soley to the individual.

Should be interesting to see how this settles out in the coming year with a President who intends to maintain an online presence – clearly sustained by his staff unless it is on video.
http://blog.stroutmeister.com Aaron Strout

Scott – great discussion here. I've talked to a number of people that grapple with the topic of combining their professional and personal lives. For me, a like having a blend of the two. I think it gets back to the days before the phone and internet played a major role in how companies did business. If I was a store owner, I knew about the personal lives of my customers AND let them know about mine as well. It created a deeper tie and made them (hopefully) more inclined to do business with me.

The beauty of all things social/community starting to bloom now (thank you Obama for reinforcing this point) is that we can now get back to those days of mixing business with personal stuff. Of course, there needs to be a balance as too much “noise” vs. “signal” can be annoying. For me, that's more of what I struggle with as I self-monitor my life streaming and blogging activities.

Thanks for the shout out!

Best,
Aaron | @aaronstrout
http://www.timjahn.com/blog Tim Jahn

Interesting (and very important) question you pose here. I think most people are inclined to immediately say you should have a separate identity for work and personal. But does that really make sense?

We're all people…we all have personal lives. We understand what happens in personal lives and can relate.
http://www.costadevault.com/blog/ Doreen Overstreet

Someone asked this question this morning at a social media roundtable and it got me thinking too. The speaker said that younger generations are more apt to blend their work and personal lives (work is life, life is work attitude). My work defines a lot about who I am, so I guess I'm more apt to blend the two. I like to follow people who are honest about who they are and what makes them tick – so incorporating personal and professional seems like the most natural thing to do. I agree with the comment about having one “persona.” But it is a matter of choice and I'm glad we all have the opportunity to make it.
http://punchy.typepad.com Eric Matas

What would Sybil do?

I used to get very freaked out by the brazen MySpacers–kids these days–putting personal info online. I feared the very rare: bad guys using MySpace to find kids. Nonetheless, kids (and non kids) are used to a new kind of transparency, putting it all out on the web.

There have been incidences reported of people getting fired due to their MySpace party pics. And, interestingly, my sister is in grad school where they do not recommend that students have a MySapce account, but Facebook is OK.

It's sort of the Christmas party dilemna (to bring up another Seinfeld episode): party like work or party like the real me? Perhaps a more transparent world will tame the party animals.

Personally, I like the transparency. But I do have to work to keep it clean. I switched my original twitter handle (@ericmatas) because people were spelling it wrong (now it's @tweric). One friend suggested that I create a “fake” twitter account to say all the inappropriate things, thus protecting @tweric from my inner HR nightmare self. Haven't done it yet… ;-)
Nishland

I would agree to keep things personal. As a hopeful business owner, building relationships is key. Sure it is great to promote your business name, but in the end…you want people to trust in YOU as a person first, because YOU are who they are doing business with…your company is just the name you operate under.

We are all human, and have the power to make decisions. if you are going to “consolidate” your online life, then you can decide not to post those 21st birthday pictures. It is very easy to find out about someone online…no matter which name you are using. In building relationships, you put your best foot forward (period).
http://brandieyoung.wordpress.com/ Brandiei

Scott – very thought provoking! And it would be easier if there was a “one size fits all” answer.

I’m with you – I can’t turn the various parts of my identity on and off, or segment per audience. But, is the audience really segmented?

I’m looking forward to seeing how the issue plays out for brands. I could argue it round or square. On the one hand, what we seem to embrace is the authenticity of connecting with a person from the company, like Scott Monty or Arron Strout, as opposed to the company itself. I follow Scott and Aaron, not necessarily their brand. That said, their association gives their brand lift in my eyes because I respect the people. So … does the brand then lose equity when/if they pursue other ventures? I guess that remains to be seen.

I will be interested to see how effective corporate social media policies, like those implemented at Intel and the NYT, are at protecting brands. I wonder how long it will be before big companies ban access to SM sites to shield them from legal actions so common in a litigious society. And more, the sort of actions brought against employees that ‘break the rules’.

Awesome job on this, Scott!

Brandie
@Brandiei on Twitter
michsineath

Let's face it. Many of us take our work home with us. I'm often blogging or tweeting about work on the weekend; many of my friends on Facebook and Twitter are also my colleagues. So while I lean toward the belief of adopting one social media identity, and believe that's where we're heading, I worry about the consequences of an accidental misfire.

Plain text can easily be misconstrued. So in an environment where plain text rules the roost, it is a concern that my tweet could potentially cost me my job. At the same time, each of my social networking profiles clearly states my professional affiliation for transparency reasons. And if I can be traced back to my organization, won't I still be held accountable? And isn't that the same as having one identity? I don't know. Often bloggers will post disclaimers on their personal Web sites claiming their opinions are not representative of the company they work for. But does that act as a cloak of invisibility and protect them in cases where they really screw up? Of course not.

An interesting debate, for sure. And in my case, I often retweet myself because I share many of the same interests with the affiliates of my organization. Still, I remain cognizant that my organization has spent a lifetime crafting its message for the world. Who am I to step in and indirectly screw that up? So out of an abundance of caution, I use two.
http://www.danaedwards.com danaedwards

Good topic for discussion. I would be surprised if most people online haven't thought for a good bit about this. In the end, I went for having one and that one being the same as my real name. The way I view it is that people are the sum of the things they do and the experiences they have. When I see that someone has a second or third identity, I always wonder why they do. Are they hiding something? Is this some sort of game for them?

I've not been able to come up with any good reasons to this point mostly because I view the separation between work and life as artificial. Life is the aggregation of work, non-work, family, sports, or whatever you do. I believe that people should be proud of all of what they do and understand that they are embodiment of everything together – not buckets. The end result of having one id / site is that you are truer to yourself and will develop trust in your followers faster because they know that there is a real person behind the id (hopefully).

Dana | @danaedwards
http://mediaemerging.com Scott Hepburn

How appropriate that you weighed in Rosie. Even though we've known each other for some time now, I still find myself slipping when I talk about you by name. I STILL screw up and call you Rose Beezy (and I'll never live it down!).

I'm curious — do you have opportunities to represent @carolinajobs offline, too? I wonder if the name vs. company name issue takes on a new layer of complexity for Social Media users who are not public faces of their companies.

Anyone have thoughts on this?
http://mediaemerging.com Scott Hepburn

Love your point about “brand lift,” Brandie.

I am more likely to do business with MarketingProfs because of Ann Handley, whose “Twitter brand” is borrowed from the company. I am more likely to do business with Ford because of Scott Monty, who retains his own personal “Twitter brand.”

It begs the question: Does the brand matter?

And here's another monkey wrench: I don't know the first damn thing about Powered, where Aaron Strout works, or about his former company Mzinga. And yet, despite low brand familiarity, I'd be more willing to hear a sales pitch from either of those companies BECAUSE of Aaron.

So, again…does the brand matter? How much? What are the implications for brands?
Pingback: One social media identity, or two? « Nonprofit Educatience
http://mediaemerging.com Scott Hepburn

Great comments, everyone.

Here's a new twist on this conversation: Since there seems to be a lot of support for single social media identities, what happens to brands? Can brands exist in social media without puppeteers? Do we need to know — personally — the men and women who give voice to the brand?
http://cruisesource.us Rich Tucker – CruiseSource.us

Scott,

Great post…It is an interesting dilemma.

Personally, I am attempting to build two seperate IDs Online. My Personal ID and My Biz Brand…they intertwine because I like my Business Brand CruiseSource.us to have personality. The only Social Media tool where I have set up seperate accounts is Twitter. FaceBook is Personal, Linkedin is Personal/Professional, Blog is the Business and on Twitter I have 2 accounts. CruiseSource is a more narrow focus on Twitter and @RichTucker is me which includes a Travel and Cruises, but also includes family, entertainment, hobbies, other business ideas, politics etc.

Sometimes having two Twitter IDs is difficult and I then I think about just having one…then I think of a tweet I want to post that would not find appropriate in any coming from @CruiseSource.

We are currently working on a strategy for other employees setting up social media account representing the business and themselves…that is a little more difficult!

RichTucker
@CruiseSource
michsineath

Of course, logistically speaking, brands can't exist in social media without someone manning the outpost. Do we need to know who makes the call? Absolutely. If asked.
http://mediaemerging.com Scott Hepburn

Thanks for weighing in, Rich. I think of you as an absolute authority on this — the way you're handling separate IDs for @CruiseSource and @RichTucker is a perfect example of this debate in action.

I'm eager to hear what you learn while crafting a social media policy/strategy for employees. Let me know if you ever need a sounding board.
ebrenner

I guess I portray myself as a person who owns one company and works for another. But the better question is how do people perceive me? I go for one profile/account. Twitter tends to be heavier on the professional stuff, Facebook heavier on the personal stuff (though always bearing in mind my “frolleagues” are seeing this stuff too), and LinkedIn is pretty much all professional.
http://riveting.rosie.reilman.com Rosie Reilman @rosebeezy

Yeah I started out using a nickname and realized after the fact that it probably would've been better to use my full name. However, my name is pretty long and by the time I made that realization, I'd already become known to my followers and developed my persona under the nickname. I choose now, not to change it. Besides if you look up my screenname my full name is in my profile. I don't see it as a problem. Some others would maybe disagree with me.

As far as @carolinajobs I haven't really decided what to do with it. It's more of my company's brand than mine. Besides talking about it and signing my name to some DM's I don't really see it as ME. I manage it, I manage the information that it provides those followers. But that's about as far as it goes. Again, maybe there's a better way to to do it. That's just what I've been doing to this point.

I feel a lot of what Rich talks about below with @CruiseSource is similar to what I'm experiencing with the @carolinajobs identity.
http://riveting.rosie.reilman.com Rosie Reilman @rosebeezy

Another thought hit me too: why did you choose mediaemerging.com for your URL and not scotthepburn.com? Why did you transfer over to a new blog and not stick with the PR branded blog? These questions can be asked and answered on Twitter screenname as well, I think. Essentially it's the same concept, no?
http://www.twitter.com/nickfooter Nick Footer

This interests me much because I work for a PRstore and was asked to create a PRstore identity on Facebook, Myspace, and a few other sites. I feel that the Facebook Fan page has been the most beneficial due to the ability to track our membership at a deeper level and share information.

I have my own Facebook page and have most if not all the connections that the PRstore page is connected with. There are definitely been times where I feel a bit forces into acting a certain way online because I'm representing my store location. It has taken away some of the truthfulness of who I am.

Thanks for the great debate!

PS: In the local paper there in an article, “Facebook, the social-networking site: Great tool to link people, or an ego-driven, time wasting imitation of real friendship?”
http://mediaemerging.com Scott Hepburn

I created this blog (my personal blog) to give me more latitude to blog about topics outside of PRstore's core business areas. Social media marketing, for example, is something I'm very interested in, but that isn't (yet) something PRstore is equipeed for. Stay tuned, though…

As for the domain name, my thinking was twofold. First, ScottHepburn.com wasn't available. Second, I wanted to leave the door open for building something bigger than myself. Checking my ego at the door makes room for guest bloggers, new team members and more.

Great questions, Rosie!
http://dannybrown.me Danny Brown

Great question, Scott, and not one that has a black and white answer.

As you mentioned, I changed my username on Twitter to @dannybrown from my previous one, which was my company. Cut long story short, I had wanted @dannybrown to start with but it was taken. I later learned it was a dead account so had Twitter release it for me, but if it had been available from the start I would have used it.

It is a personal brand thing, I believe – I use various analytical tools and I find that more clients/potential clients find me by searches for “danny brown pr” or “danny brown + social media”. I still get results from press release and PR agency searches, but my name seems to be coming up more now.

Is this a result of my clients beginning to talk about me more, or is it because people recall something I may have said on Twitter or a Facebook status message> Or Friendfeed discussions? So they recall my name and what I do, and that's where the searches come from?

I guess time will tell – but the fact that it's my name and not my company that's being primarily looked for tells me where my brand strengths lie and where I may need to improve.

With regards employees of a company, I do feel that as long as there are certain safeguards in place, then by all means use the brand identity as well. It helps build their authority (if the brand is respected, of course) and it offers the brand itself further outreach.

Love to see what others say, think you've opened up a great debate here. :)
http://candidkatie.com Katie Morse

Ooh, GREAT question. We discussed something similar at the Social Media Breakfast – Raleigh yesterday.

I know some people vote for separation, but I belong in the camp that votes for one “persona”.

I do keep certain things off certain mediums (for example, I don't curse on Twitter, or reveal my political or religious beliefs). I also use the Facebook privacy controls to limit certain groups of people from seeing items on my profile.