Background Checks: An Essential Tool for Influencer Marketing, Sweepstakes, and Contests

Specialized background checks are highly recommended to protect brands using influencer marketing or publicizing prize promotion winners. The fast pace of social media leaves advertisers exposed to negative publicity. The appropriate background checks can provide legal and public relations protections.

Several years ago, Kyle-Beth Hilfer discussed the emerging need for background checks with Shannon Tulloss, a licensed private investigator whose company specializes in vetting potential sweepstakes and contest winners, spokespersons, influencers and brand ambassadors. At the time, influencer marketing was in its infancy, and brand were just beginning to leverage social media prize promotions. This month, Ms. Hilfer sat down again with Ms. Tulloss for an updated conversation.

Q. Historically, when did brands start incorporating background checks of potential winners into their prize promotion administration?

A. I started receiving calls in the early 2000s for this specific service.In recent years, we are now regularly hired to vet brand ambassadors and influencers in addition to potential promotional prize winners and potential scholarship recipients. Back then, we were approached by a network to vet some finalists for a well-known television show, and since then we have performed a huge amount of these vetting investigations. Seeing a need, I specifically designed a work product designed to protect the interest of the brand.

It is more important than ever to protect brand integrity. The link to live and ongoing content generation is in everyone’s hands and is used daily. Now, the key to remaining relevant in today’s world includes eliciting likes, and now people post about everything: family, pets, jobs, neighbors, coworkers, etc., and a review of this content can prove invaluable to a brand in establishing whether they want to take a chance with that particular person or entity publicly.

Q.Why do you think brands started doing background checks and investigations on potential prize winners and influencers?

A. The influencer industry is said to be worth about $5 billion in advertising spending, so forming mutually beneficial alliances seems to be a marketing outlet that will continue to be pursued. In forming almost any kind of mutually beneficial relationship, it is better to understand in advance with whom you are partnering. We point out potentially terrible optics, and it’s not always just about their prior civil and criminal records.Vetting winners before they are announced through an experienced, licensed investigative company is the best step toward brand image preservation and avoiding potential bad press or litigation.

We once discovered that the finalist for an all-expense paid, high-end vacation package was covertly planning to take his mistress instead of his wife, when we were provided with his companion’s name to vet. The problem was the wife was the one who submitted the entry nominating her husband. Clearly, the optics on this publicized outcome were ones that the brand had not considered. Another time, a potential winner was about to be awarded a meet-and-greet with a celebrity. We unearthed content showing that this person actually hated the celebrity’s political views. The potential winner was planning to use the event to make a contrary political statement. The person’s goal was to boost personal social media engagement. Armed with this knowledge, the brand was able to leverage its giveaway rules and disqualify the individual from becoming a winner.

Q. Is there any type of prizewinner, influencer, or brand ambassador for whom you think vetting is unnecessary?

A. It depends on the amount of risk. The bigger the brand, the larger the risk they are assuming, but negative publicity can blindside even Mom and Pop businesses . They should consider how much they will have to spend on legal advice and additional marketing to spin away a negative result. It depends on the amount of risk the promotion will bring to the brand. If the prize is a tangible item like a piece of electronics or a gift card, then it may not be necessary. However, if that device or product is then touted online as a prize, I’d advise extreme caution. I’d want the business to vet those “ambassadors or influencers.” I tell my clients not to decide based solely on prize values. Instead, they should think about risk mitigation.

Q. For what types of sweepstakes/contests do your clients use background checks to vet potential winners?

A. We are frequently brought in to vet everyone who will benefit from a prize winning (guests included), on a promotion that results in publicity. To cut corners on their risk mitigation efforts, is like putting on one sock to hike in the woods. We strongly recommend vetting everyone connected to the winner, including family members and known associates, to protect the outcome of the promotion.

Q. How do you partner with legal counsel in putting together a prize promotion?

A. The advertiser or brand should work with a qualified legal professional, like yourself, in the planning stages of a prize promotion. Legal counsel usually covers what needs to be included in the rules and what kind of releases may be necessary. Without the proper rules, my background checks may be in legal jeopardy. I also find legal assistance helpful in drafting language to reassure contestants’ that their personal information will not become publicly available through the process. While this is not legally necessary, I often turn to legal  counsel to help cover this point in the rules and help maintain public confidence in the brand.

Q. I find clients are often confused between an employer background check and an investigative background check. Could you explain the difference?

A. Unless the individual is being offered a traditional employee position within the brand, then the very regulated employee background check is not useful. Even a qualified researcher may not know how to run the appropriate background checks that we are talking about here. When we are brought in, we use many resources that are not available to the public. They are not available to the public, since they should not be. They are just too powerful. As a result, our results are far more comprehensive than an employer background check. These background checks unearth so many dark secrets that a typical employment check would never find.

Q. Can you give an example of a promotion that failed to use background checks, resulting in a public relations problem for the brand?

A. One international brand put 30 small business owners on planes and sent them all to a beach resort as the recipients of a business mentorship.After they were already at the resort, we were tasked as an afterthought to vet this group.Our results: 18% of the recipients had significant, criminal histories, most rooted in violence, one even had a pending rape charge. Another had child porn on his business site in a hidden portion of a page. Two had unpaid child support. One was a heroin dealer who was actively selling the drug using a pseudonym on a local page. And one had a pending inter-state pursuit charge processing through the courts of three states. Obviously, the brand immediately pulled down all mention online of this promotion, due to our findings, which was a real shame.

Q. It is always best to involve legal counsel in the planning stages of a promotion. Is the same true for a private investigator?

A. Yes! Often, our clients bring us in to consult about their investigative needs for each specific contest. Brands also need to factor the background check investigation into their production timeline. We have found that it is more cost effective to agree to an investigative game plan rather than trying to furiously piece it together at the last minute.This allows us to be staffed and scheduled in advance to facilitate a smooth completion of the contest, within their budget.Vetting should never be an afterthought.

Q. When I discuss vetting with clients, I sometimes find that brands are concerned about making prize eligibility based on a willingness to have a background check. They are concerned about alienating their customer base. How do you respond to that?

A. The brand may want to alter the wording to suit the demographic targeted by the promotion. For example, perhaps including verbiage that says that a background check is required for entry, to protect them as well as those who enter. I have never had a significant push back on the signing off of our paperwork allowing us to complete the investigation. The ones who do push back or object typically have histories that do not align with the brand ideologies (or criminal histories).

Q. What would you say to an advertiser who is concerned that pulling a prize from a potential winner may seem unfair?

A. By entering the promotion voluntarily, the contestant is agreeing to the rules and conditions of the contest or sweepstakes, which should always set out an investigation as a pre-condition of winning. The contestant has the option of retracting his entry should he be uncomfortable with the vetting requirements. In today’s sensitive environment, brands need to protect themselves from negative publicity that can impact their reputations and financial health.

Q. What kind of infractions do you let slide for influencers and prize winners? Traffic tickets? Misdemeanors? Where do you draw the line?

A. Again, my opinion has changed in this regard. It totally depends on potential risk. Risk mitigation is the sole focus of my work product. I don’t advise simply comparing the cost of a solid vetting investigation provided by my office with the actual prize value. That is simply not an advisable method of calculation of value of the service.The typical cost-benefit calculation is of limited value. It reduces a project down to a simple number. In reality, the success or failure of this promotion relies on many factors and can be undermined by unforeseen events. We point out potential pitfalls in the form of useful intelligence that  clients use to make informed decisions. That’s how to manage risk.

Q. I usually recommend to clients that once they have decided to vet potential winners, they should examine more than criminal background but also political views, public behavior, etc. Do you agree?

A. Absolutely, yes. Some brands want to screen for potential winners who might use the brand as a platform for extremist views or organizations. We also have located a surprising number of posts featuring content these influencers were sharing promoting illegal activities, shallow and disrespectful content, and/or environmentally harmful content.

For more information about how background checks can help provide legal protection for your brand, contact us here.