National memory institutions' social media policies and risk management: a content analysis

PurposeAmong the current discourses around social media risk management (SMRM) is whether institutions perceive social media (SM) as more of an opportunity to be embraced and regulated, or a risk to be avoided or mitigated, how this is reflected in their policies and how institutional stance reflects their regulation and management of SM use and practices. There is currently no scholarly literature that addresses these for the memory sector where SM use has proliferated. This research aims to address this gap by putting a focus on national memory institutions (MIs), whose strategies and operations are often governed by a public/civic mandate.Design/methodology/approachThis research involves a comprehensive literature review and a content analysis. The review includes studies that have analysed institutional SM policies in other sectors. The review informs our content analysis both in terms of approaches and in terms of identifying areas for comparisons. Following an initial scoping review and a close inspection, a sample of eight policies of national MIs were included in the content analysis.FindingsThe content analysis led to the identification of 8 core themes and 36 sub-themes. The main themes are concerned with account management, audience management, rules for use, protecting institutional interests, legal considerations, the purpose of the policy, nature of postings and referencing information. Also emerged from the findings are a few gaps that we expect will provide a platform for further discourses with regard to the potentially complex role SM policies have in MIs and the broader cultural heritage sector in relation to their public/civic mandates.Originality/valueThis is the first close SM policy analysis for the memory sector focusing on national MIs. This research contributes insights into how national-level MIs tend to frame the opportunities and the risk of SM use, the ways in which they govern SM usage and their different approaches to SMRM. The findings have implications for SM policy development and implementations, and further iterations of SM policies in the memory sector.Peer reviewThe peer review history for this article is available at: https://publons.com/publon/10.1108/OIR-09-2020-0421