Using data from 150 million sources, Salesforce Radian6 tracked social media conversations about the Olympics on Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, and others sites. The chart shows social media mentions of the top medal-winning countries during the second week of the Olympics. Consistent with the number of wins in the actual games, the United States ranks first. From a business communication perspective, the chart is rather easy to understand, but it can be improved. Also, at least one description of the chart is questionable: "But Great Britain, fourth in the medal standings, surges to the second spot in social media mentions." For participants, the press, and others writing about the games, the International Olympic Committee published social media guidelines . The guidelines encourage social media participation and explain acceptable uses of photographs and trademark symbols. As expected, the guidelines warn writers about violations of policy: " The IOC will continue to monitor Olympic on-line content to ensure that the integrity of rights-holding broadcasters and sponsor rights as well as the Olympic Charter is maintained. The IOC asks for the support of all participants and other accredited persons in halting any ambush activity or any sites engaged in conduct which is offensive to or adversely affects the goodwill associated with the Olympic Games and the Olympic Movement. The IOC asks that participants and other accredited persons discovering unauthorised content, please report it immediately to www.olympicgamesmonitoring.com." As we know from some examples , not everyone respected these guidelines. Discussion Starters: In what ways can the chart be improved to improve readability and accuracy? What is potentially questionable about the article quote, above, about Great Britain? How should this be fixed? How effective are the social media guidelines? What, if anything, would you suggest that the International Olympic Committee change for next year?