Noem shares more ‘influencer’ posts that critics label unethical and ‘bad judgment’

Smile Texas isn’t the only business South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem is promoting to her social media followers.

The second-term governor promoted two other South Dakota businesses on her personal X feed (formerly Twitter) on Thursday: Fit My Feet in Rapid City, owned by state Department of Public Safety Secretary Bob Perry’s son, and Common Grounds, a Spearfish coffee shop where she hosted her latest town hall this week.

“They are my favorite. This coffee shop is amazing. You have to come in,” Noem said in the 22-second video clip at Common Grounds. “Bryon and I come in all the time. You will enjoy it. They love America and that is a special gift to me and a pep talk to this country. They are the backbone of South Dakota. Come visit them: Common Grounds in Spearfish, South Dakota.”

Some elected officials regularly post photos and videos of their interactions with constituents or businesses. In the age of social media, it’s a strategy to show they’re engaged with their base and are listening to their concerns.

South Dakota’s U.S. Sens. Mike Rounds and John Thune and U.S. Rep. Dusty Johnson post about their visits, industry tours and roundtable discussions online. Sometimes they’ll compliment a local restaurant for a meal on the road. One of Thune’s latest shoutouts regarded the “legendary” hot beef sandwiches at Al’s Oasis after posing next to a taxidermy bison named Al.

But a review of their X posts over the last 10 months showed they didn’t tell their followers to visit those establishments or buy a product — or in other words, influence them.

Noem did several times this week on social media, and has in the past as well, including suggesting that her followers buy a motorcycle from Black Hills Harley-Davidson.

That crosses an ethical line, said Michael Card, associate professor emeritus of political science at the University of South Dakota in Vermillion.

“It changes other people’s behavior, or could change their behavior, which is why the label of ‘social media influencer’ is such a fraught place to be for an elected official,” Card said. “… If you’re a state official you just shouldn’t be doing that.”

Noem received national attention for posting and participating in a five-minute video endorsing a Texas dental office where she received treatment. The Monday post sparked calls for investigation by some state lawmakers and a lawsuit by a Washington, D.C., based consumer advocacy group.

The lawsuit from Travelers United alleges Noem violated a D.C. law. That law requires social media influencers to disclose whether they received payment or free or discounted services in exchange for their endorsement. The group says D.C. has jurisdiction because residents of the district can view Noem’s posts.

The Legislature’s Government Operations and Audit Committee isn’t planning to investigate the video further, according to reporting by The Dakota Scout.

The legislative Executive Board doesn’t plan to review her conduct either, said chairman of the board and Senate President Pro Tempore Lee Schoenbeck, R-Watertown. It’s an ethical question because “somebody used poor judgment,” he said, but it doesn’t call for disciplinary action.

Neither does the state need further ethics laws, he added, saying it’s “clear Noem is done running for office in South Dakota” based on the dental video. Presidential candidate Donald Trump has confirmed that he’s considering Noem as his running mate.

“I think ballot boxes are about bad judgment,” Schoenbeck said. “We have laws for embezzlement, theft, misuse of state resources. We don’t need any more laws. People just need to take elections seriously.”

But if Noem was any other civil servant, Card said, she would likely be disciplined for the posts even if she wasn’t compensated for them. The practice – especially the Texas dentistry video – “reflects unfavorably” on the state and challenges people’s confidence in the Governor’s Office, Card said.

But she isn’t subject to career service rules.

“It begs the question, if the boss can do this, why can’t I?” Card said. “If you’re acting in a manner that could be perceived as detrimental to the state, you’re setting others up to do the same thing. Should we be engaging in conduct that causes people to think less of state government, that the governor is a social media influencer trying to get people to look at other people’s businesses?”

Noem’s office has not disclosed if she received compensation, discounted services, or other benefits from posting any of the videos. Her spokesman, Ian Fury, did not respond to messages Friday from South Dakota Searchlight.

Dan Ahlers, executive director of the South Dakota Democratic Party, said the nationwide ethics discussion spurred by Noem is evidence that South Dakota legislators should revise the state’s ethics laws.

“I think we should have some kind of code of conduct for publicly elected officials,” Ahlers said. “The fact is we don’t have a line.”

South Dakota scored an “F” in the last state integrity investigation by the Center for Public Integrity in 2015. The investigation gauged the strength of the state’s anti-corruption laws.

South Dakota voters passed the anti-corruption Initiated Measure 22 in 2016, but the law was partially dismantled by the Legislature. The state’s Government Accountability Board, which is made up of retired judges, was established instead to review misconduct allegations for statewide offices and executive branch employees. The board could investigate Noem’s conduct if there is an official complaint submitted.

Card said the state would benefit from an independent review of the behavior, without disciplinary authority.

At the very least, the governor should stop promoting specific businesses and disclose if she received a discount or payment for any of the videos she posts encouraging her followers to do business at certain locations, Card said. If she is being compensated in any way to be an influencer, then that distracts her from her job as governor, both Ahlers and Schoenbeck added.

“If you’re receiving benefits because of that,” Card said, “that’s a complete other step. That’s a hard line, the hard red line. If you step over that line, there should be no doubt that’s an ethical violation.”

This article originally appeared on Sioux Falls Argus Leader: Kristi Noem shares more ‘influencer’ posts that critics label unethical