I hear more and more stories of seemingly minor customer service issues being trumpeted on Twitter to cause damage to a brand. These posts are also meant to gain the attention of others on Twitter and the brand itself.
Twitter and other social networking sites provide a healthy connection between consumers and brands. Yes, the good brands are listening, and the best brands interact and quickly resolve customer service issues often to the delight of the disgruntled consumer. But, the rush to air grievances on Twitter is troubling, since more and more consumers now completely shun in-person, phone or email channels to resolve an issue. Some consumers seem to relish the attention Twitter provides and the power it gives them over big brands.
Individuals have a good amount of leverage with brands given the power of social networking and the speed of information exchange online. However, the rush to air grievances to the world and confront brands online rather than using quieter means can easily backfire for consumers. The tenant now being sued by her landlord over a Twitter post is just one example of how seemingly innocuous online comments can become a case of libel with malicious intent.
How the brand handles potentially confrontational social networking situations is key. How much transparency is necessary or warranted? Should the brand focus on appeasement in all cases?
The brand will suffer the most from any unfriendly social networking interactions, and be viewed by the public as the bully–the big, bad corporation picking on the little guy or gal regardless of the content or intent of the original interaction.
Not all publicity is good publicity, especially in social media where your mistakes are announced to the world and discussed in excruciating detail.
For a brand handling consumer complaints online the going is calm and courteous. Anything else could be devastating for public relations.
The UK Libel Laws have taken another step into the abyss and could signal the end of Free Speech. A UK based media club, The Groucho Club which is owned by a billion pound corporation ‘Graphite Capital’ have launched a one of kind High Court action for a pre publishing test case for libel against Tyrone D Murphy, the author of an exposé book about the club. The book has not been completed yet and the case seems to be based on what could be written and not what has been written.
The writer is defending this action in person as the costs are astronomical and I am supporting this writer and his cause. All writers and journalists should also support him as he is in the forefront of the battle for free speech.
What do you make of this type of case where a legal action can be taken against a writer of a book that has not been written yet? This action is certainly a threat against all writers and journalists
http://www.g-book.co.uk is the book web site