Have you ever felt like you knew someone - I mean, really knew someone - trusted them, cared about them, only to have your world turned upside down when you found out that they weren’t at all the person you thought them to be?

Did you then doubt yourself - particularly your judgment? Did you wonder, “am I really that poor a judge of character?”

Sadly, if you’re like me, you probably answered “yes” to most (if not all) of these questions.

As someone who is a staunch advocate of social media and the real-time web and their ability to connect people and ideas from all over the world, I hear words like “authenticity” and “transparency” thrown around all the time as the key elements to “success.” I don’t argue that. In fact, I agree that both are important.

I just question how much “authenticity” and “transparency” there really is - online or in “real life.” Jonathan Fields touched on this topic in a recent blog post: “Is Social Media Killing Authenticity?” He used phrases like “cautiously authentic” and “tactically transparent.” Basically, he admits to editing what he says (and outlines some very valid reasons why) in an attempt to prevent people from taking what he says out of context and turning something benign into a gossip-laden free-for-all.

Jonathan uses social media as the backdrop, but I think the problem goes well beyond social media. It is deeply personal.

For me, authenticity and transparency matter. But, the ultimate trump card is INTEGRITY.

Remember that person you knew, trusted and cared about that knifed you in the back? Me, too. And, I would lay bets that if you stripped everything else away, you’d come to the same conclusion I did. The reason the whole thing went down like it did is because that person ended up showing zero integrity. They said one thing to your face (what you wanted to hear) and then turned around and did or said something in direct contradiction to what they said they would.

I think so many of us want to paint a certain picture of ourselves. a picture of who we want others to think we are, not necessarily who we really are. When we do that, when we operate outside and apart from our core values, (or what Gary Vaynerchuk consistently refers to as “our DNA”) we are operating outside of integrity - we do not live in a manner consistent with what we profess to be about.

Example: Picture a group of people who you can tell really enjoy being around each other. You can tell they’re close. When together, they talk about loving and serving other people, looking out for each other, picking each other up when they are down and how those things make them feel so good. They have really deep conversations, get really philosophical, even emotional. I mean they love all over each other.

Now, imagine that one of the group members falls ill and can’t make it to as many gatherings. Picture that person at home, feeling down, needing nothing more than a short phone call to ask them, “How are you doing?” or “Is there anything I can do for you?” Now, imagine the heartache when the phone doesn’t ring. No knock at the door. No Facebook wall post. No text message. Nothing.

I know what you’re thinking, “Oh, just wait. Someone will call.” I mean, this person was a member of a group of people that were all about loving and serving others, right. It makes them feel good. But, nothing.

You see, in the group setting, each person may have been authentic - loving and helping people does make a person feel good, after all (try it) - and maybe even transparent with their feelings. But, when it comes down to living it out, they don’t.

Integrity is about doing what you say you’ll do. It’s about being a person whose word means something, has value and credibility.

If you tell one person one thing (usually to try gain approval or validation), then turn around and tell another person something completely different, or worse, breach the first person’s trust (read my previous post, “The Myth of Trust”), you have no integrity.

So, be true to yourself. Value others. Be authentic. Be transparent. But, above all, be a person of integrity.

Because, at the end of the day, having integrity is more important than being liked. Isn’t it?

I have to get this off my chest before I explode.

This all started as a result of my searching for Diet Trop-A-Rocka™ Tea, the flavor created by Bret Michaels as part of the final task on The Celebrity Apprentice. (I tried - and really liked - Compassionberry™ Tea created by Holly Robinson Peete, so I wanted to try Bret’s, too.)

In a May 24, 2010 BrandWeek interview, two Dr Pepper Snapple Group executives - SVP of Marketing Andrew Springate and EVP Jim Trebilcock - talked about the “restage” of the Snapple brand. For those of you that don’t know, a “restage” is the fancy term advertising executives use to describe the process of trying to resuscitate a virtually dead product or brand.

Springate explained:

[Snapple is] a good example of what we’ve been committed to as a company. About a year ago, [the brand] was floundering and it wasn’t very differentiated. We spent a lot of time really listening to our drinkers, found out what worked on the brand, and [discovered that] we needed to do some reformulation work and really find better ways to connect our product with them. So, about a year ago, we restaged it, [rolled out] new graphics, changed the formulation to really emphasize tasty black tea, healthy green teas and real sugar, and marketed that in a really big way, and all of that culminated in the Snapple-The Celebrity Apprentice [integration], and we saw great consumer response.

And in a bit of poetic irony, Trebilcock followed that up, saying:

It’s one of those stories where people love the brand, but they kind of fell away from it and didn’t think it was as relevant.

Where do I start?

The Snapple Fan Page on Facebook really tells the story because it completely contradicts what Springate asserts in his response.

He says Snapple is a “good example of what we’re committed to as a company.” A “good example” of “commitment?” Really? Committed to what? Committed to putting up a static fan page with a Snapple Real Fact or Best Stuff episode posted every few days for good measure while passionate brand ambassadors virtually implore you engage with them?

Springate continues, “We spent a lot of time really listening to our drinkers, found out what worked on the brand, and [discovered that] we needed to do some reformulation work and really find better ways to connect our product with them.”

There is so much crammed into that statement.

I am not going to argue that Snapple spent a lot of time “really listening to [their] drinkers.” Maybe they did. Or do. But, what good does it do if the people you are supposedly listening to don’t know they are being heard?! I couldn’t find a single instance where a response was issued to fans’ questions on the Snapple Fan Page. Not ONE!

Further, the people are telling you “what works” for the brand, and you are ignoring them!

Finally, the better way to “connect your product” to your target market is to ENGAGE THEM! They’re practically begging you!

Instead of patting themselves on the back for rolling out new graphics, reformulating (an already great product, I might add - remember “New Coke?”) and “marketing that in a really big way,” I’d argue it would be better to address the “great consumer response” you’ve been getting by acknowledging it.

And right there is the irony in Trebilcock’s statement:

It’s one of those stories where people love the brand, but they kind of fell away from it and didn’t think it was as relevant.

If Snapple doesn’t wake up and get in the game, the brand will once again have a lovable brand with people falling away from it (in droves) because it isn’t relevant. How can you possibly expect to be relevant when you don’t communicate with your most passionate supporters?

Here’s what one Fan had to say:

That about sums it up.

Having a Facebook page, a Twitter account, and a YouTube channel doesn’t make you relevant. Just “being there” isn’t enough. You have to engage (though you may want to internalize some of the lessons Nestle learned from their social media disaster first).

I will say this: since I started writing this, Snapple has released a new Best Stuff Episode (#6) and addresses some of the Trop-A-Rocka™ chatter going on - sort of.

But, they are still completely silent on Facebook and Twitter (here’s proof), leaving potential brand ambassadors flapping in the breeze, fending for themselves, searching for answers.

I originally contributed this piece as a guest post for Kyle Lacy (05/19/2010). I thought it was interesting enough to share here, too.

Benjamin Franklin and Twitter may not appear to have much – if anything – in common, but history tells a different story.

In fact, the impact that social media sites like Twitter have had on how we communicate is a near reflection of the massive shift in colonial communications that occurred under then Postmaster General, Benjamin Franklin.

Franklin, a renowned inventor, brilliant thinker and respected statesman, instituted changes to the postal system that created a revolutionary shift in communications. Franklin instituted night travel for postal riders – Night Riders – cutting delivery time in half. More importantly, however, this new delivery method pulled the distant regions of the colonies together. He created a communications network that was one of the best in the world – one that the British didn’t know existed.

The Boston Massacre was a pivotal point leading up to the Revolutionary war. The British thought that they would be able to contain the story, but before word reached England, most of America had already heard the news.

Flash forward to today.

Let’s change the context a little. Imagine for a moment that England is a corporation, that the Night Riders are Twitter or Facebook, that the Boston Massacre is a poor customer experience.

It’s not much of a stretch because many companies – even though they are aware social media exist – don’t understand the power of the social media. So, when a customer has a problem or bad experience, news of that event is instantly broadcast to the masses. The story cannot be contained, it can only be responded to. And, if it is ignored or not handled well, that company may find itself in the middle of a revolution. And, we all know who came out on top the first time around.

The speed of distribution and consumption of information via social media has revolutionized how we communicate and trampled geographical and social borders – much like Benjamin Franklin’s Night Riders did in the 1700s.

Having a voice is no longer in question. The question becomes, “How will you use it?”