
Rules and ethics
5 questions Edinburgh brand teams must settle before a Scottish listening pilot
Social listening tools in an Edinburgh pilot raise five questions on Scots law, Scottish Government communications, source rights, retention and cross-border data.
What to take away
- Social listening tools bought for an Edinburgh pilot sit under two legal layers at once: Scots law where it differs, and UK GDPR plus the Data Protection Act 2018 everywhere else.
- Scottish Government communications need separate handlingdevolved policy areas, official accounts and public sector comms carry rules a generic vendor setup will not know.
- Source rights decide what you may keep. Platform terms, copyright and the MRS code all bite before you store a single post.
- Retention and deletion need a named owner in Edinburgh, a fixed clock and a deletion route that survives staff changes.
- Cross-border data movement must be mapped before launch, because most listening vendors process outside the UK.
Question one: which Scots law and UK law applies to the pilot
Start by separating the two. Data protection is reserved: UK GDPR and the Data Protection Act 2018 apply across Scotland exactly as in England. The Information Commissioner's Office regulates it from Wilmslow and Edinburgh, and its UK GDPR guidance and resources index is the first thing your legal lead should read.
Scots law still shapes the pilot in three ways. Delict, not tort, governs any claim that monitoring harmed someone. The law of confidence in Scotland has its own case history, which matters if you monitor private groups. And Scottish courts handle actions raised here, so your contracts should name a Scottish jurisdiction if the pilot is Edinburgh-run.
Public law adds a fourth layer. If your brand is a Scottish public body, or you work for one, the Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2002 lets people request the datasets you hold. Plan for that before collection, not after.
Write the answer down as a sentence: which law, which regulator, which court. If the team cannot agree that sentence, the pilot is not ready.
Scots and UK law checks
- UK GDPR and DPA 2018 confirmed
- Scots delict and confidence reviewed
- Scottish jurisdiction named in contracts
- FOI (Scotland) exposure checked
Question two: what Scottish Government communications the pilot must respect
The Scottish Government runs its own communications operation, separate from UK Government comms. It publishes campaigns, consultation material and official accounts across health, education, justice, transport and the economy. A listening pilot that scrapes those channels needs to know which of them are in scope.
Scottish Government comms checks
- Attribute official accounts carefully
- Build a devolved and Gaelic lexicon
- Flag consultation spikes as process
- Set owners, gates and stop rules
Three practical points. First, official Scottish Government accounts are not ordinary brand accounts: quoting them in a report can imply endorsement, so attribute carefully. Second, devolved policy topics carry their own vocabulary, and a lexicon built for UK-wide media will misread Scottish terms and miss Gaelic-language posts.
Third, consultation periods create spikes that look like sentiment shifts but are just process.
If your pilot touches public health, education or justice messaging, brief the team on the devolved context. Reading a Scottish Government consultation as a brand crisis is an easy and expensive mistake.
This is also where governance starts. Before collection, make sure you have owners, gates and stop rules for every channel in scope, including official accounts.
Question three: what source rights you hold over collected posts
Collecting a public post is not the same as holding rights in it. Copyright in the text, image or video stays with the person who made it. Platform terms govern what the platform allows you to do with its data. Neither gives you a free licence to republish.
The Market Research Society sets the professional baseline. Its Professional Standards cover data collection, privacy and the treatment of research participants, and they apply to social data gathered for insight work. MRS membership is common in Edinburgh agencies and client-side insight teams, so the standard is a realistic expectation, not an aspiration.
Individual rights sit on top. People can ask what you hold about them, ask for a copy, ask for correction, or object to processing. The ICO's guide to individual rights sets out what each request involves, and a pilot that cannot answer a subject access request within a month has a design fault.
Source rights decisions
Will you quote posts verbatim?
Copyright and platform terms apply
Lower republishing risk
When you pick a supplier, put those answers in the requirements. The source permission to exit route through supplier selection keeps rights questions in the contract rather than in a later argument.
Question three: source rights
- List every platform in scope and the terms that apply to each.
- Record whether posts will be quoted, paraphrased, anonymised or deleted after analysis.
- Set the rule for images, video and avatars.
- Write the subject access request procedure before collection starts.
Question four: how long the pilot retains data and who deletes it
Retention is where most pilots quietly fail. Data protection principles require that personal data is kept no longer than necessary, and the ICO's data protection principles guidance treats storage limitation as a live obligation, not a policy statement.
Retention defaults by data type
Data type
- Raw posts and comments
- 90 days
- Anonymised aggregates
- 12 months
- Reports and decks
- 24 months
- Supplier copies
- 90 days
Default retention
- Raw posts and comments
- Insight lead
- Anonymised aggregates
- Insight lead
- Reports and decks
- Brand lead
- Supplier copies
- Procurement
Owner
- Raw posts and comments
- Deletion log
- Anonymised aggregates
- Archive record
- Reports and decks
- Document register
- Supplier copies
- Certificate of deletion
Deletion evidence
- Raw posts and comments
- Anonymised aggregates
- Reports and decks
- Supplier copies
Set a clock. A ninety-day pilot with a thirty-day post-pilot review window is a workable default: raw posts deleted at day ninety, aggregates and reports kept for the review, then either deleted or moved to a documented archive with a stated purpose. Anything kept longer needs a reason written down.
Name a person. "The insight team" is not an owner. One named individual in Edinburgh should hold the deletion schedule, with a deputy, and both should be able to show a deletion log.
Check your supplier's side too. If the vendor keeps a copy in its own environment, your retention rule is only half enforced. Put deletion duties, timelines and evidence in the contract.
Question four: retention and deletion
| Data type | Default retention | Owner | Deletion evidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| Raw posts and comments | 90 days | Insight lead | Deletion log |
| Anonymised aggregates | 12 months | Insight lead | Archive record |
| Reports and decks | 24 months | Brand lead | Document register |
| Supplier copies | 90 days | Procurement | Certificate of deletion |
Question five: what cross-border data movement the pilot creates
Most listening tools are hosted outside the UK, usually in the United States, Ireland or another EU state. That makes the pilot a restricted transfer, and restricted transfers need a lawful mechanism before data moves.
Cross-border transfer checks
- Where is data stored at rest and in transit?
- Which sub-processors touch it?
- Which transfer mechanism applies?
- What if the mechanism is challenged?
- Map the whole route, not just servers
The ICO's international transfers guidance covers adequacy regulations, the International Data Transfer Agreement and the UK Addendum to the EU standard contractual clauses. You need to know which one your supplier relies on, and you need it in writing.
Ask four questions of every vendor. Where is data stored at rest and in transit? Which sub-processors touch it? Which transfer mechanism applies? What happens if the mechanism is challenged?
Scotland adds a small wrinkle: a supplier with an Edinburgh office and US infrastructure can move data twice, once on intake and once on support access. Map the whole route, not just the server location.
If the answers are vague, treat that as a stop signal. A pilot that cannot describe its own data route cannot be defended later.
Turning the five answers into a go or stop decision
Score each question green, amber or red. Any red stops the pilot until it clears. Two ambers need a named owner and a date before launch.
The decision belongs to a person, not a committee. Give someone own the social listening decision and let them record the five answers in one page.
Build the pilot so it can be undone. A staged rollout with a kill switch, and a design where launch can be reversed, keeps a bad call cheap.
Revisit the answers at day thirty and day sixty. Law, supplier terms and Scottish Government campaigns all move during a quarter, and a pilot that never rechecks is just an unmanaged risk.



