A Social Media Gun to the Head

Good post. Interesting perspective.

holding companies for ransom and Will we see customer service deficiencies blown out of proportion (or even faked) in an effort to extort make good concessions from brands? caught my attention. This would be as opposed to companies blowing claims of their product out of proportion, or buying stealth bloggers, or posting stealth testimonials (from their employees) on their own site in order to extort revenues from unsuspecting customers?

I think whats missed in your dialogue about Dave Carroll is the role of the customer in creating a brands story. Or creating a new chapter with the content provided by the brand. And the lack of control a brand, even as all-powerful as United may have thought themselves, has now. United created this story as much as Dave Carroll. United was co-creator of Daves video.

Maybe, David will give co-producer credit to United for his album. He should. They provided the inspiration and much of the story line for Dave to share.

And they did it to others, flight after late flight, surly service after surly service. The only issue is why there arent more stories like Daves surfacing. Or more albums being sold with help from a brand like United.

Brands like United forget they now are co-producers in our stories. They contribute elements of our story we share with others.

Uniteds brand isnt built with clever ads or marketing messages. Its built with customer interactions, customer service, customer happiness, customer word-of-mouth. Its built with the customer, not in spite of. ( Or in Uniteds case, some might say despite their customers. )
.-= Zane Safrit´s last blog ..Advertisers: do you see your disconnect here? =-.

Good post. Interesting perspective.

holding companies for ransom and Will we see customer service deficiencies blown out of proportion (or even faked) in an effort to extort make good concessions from brands? caught my attention. This would be as opposed to companies blowing claims of their product out of proportion, or buying stealth bloggers, or posting stealth testimonials (from their employees) on their own site in order to extort revenues from unsuspecting customers?

I think whats missed in your dialogue about Dave Carroll is the role of the customer in creating a brands story. Or creating a new chapter with the content provided by the brand. And the lack of control a brand, even as all-powerful as United may have thought themselves, has now. United created this story as much as Dave Carroll. United was co-creator of Daves video.

Maybe, David will give co-producer credit to United for his album. He should. They provided the inspiration and much of the story line for Dave to share.

And they did it to others, flight after late flight, surly service after surly service. The only issue is why there arent more stories like Daves surfacing. Or more albums being sold with help from a brand like United.

Brands like United forget they now are co-producers in our stories. They contribute elements of our story we share with others.

Uniteds brand isnt built with clever ads or marketing messages. Its built with customer interactions, customer service, customer happiness, customer word-of-mouth. Its built with the customer, not in spite of. ( Or in Uniteds case, some might say despite their customers. )
.-= Zane Safrit´s last blog ..Advertisers: do you see your disconnect here? =-.

I know everyone says that the beauty of social media is that it is giving the consumer a voice in what used to be a one-way conversation - business to consumer. However, social media is really the turf of the consumer and companies are never going to have the home court advantage. I wonder had United, Starbucks or any of the others, handled the situation appropriately, would the consumer really have let them have their say? After all, there are millions of consumers on twitter and only a few people tweeting per company. I'm not necessarily defending the corporations - social media is a medium that must become part of communication strategies whether they like it or not. I'm merely wondering if social media users are getting on a bit of a power trip in a way that could be detrimental to the two-way conversation that is so valued in social media.
.-= Katie Charland´s last blog ..You found out over Facebook? =-.

"Consider the career-based motives of Mr. Carroll, I suspect hed have been happy to create a positive video about United, had the $$$ and exposure been sufficient."

But do you think there was any way for United to actually guarantee that exposure? It seems people are a lot more interested in seeing negative responses to brands than positive ones. How often do we see viral videos praising a brand?

Maybe brands should start paying / compensating for positive UGC rather than compensating them after the fact...

Just some thoughts...

Sara @ iGoMogul

I know everyone says that the beauty of social media is that it is giving the consumer a voice in what used to be a one-way conversation - business to consumer. However, social media is really the turf of the consumer and companies are never going to have the home court advantage. I wonder had United, Starbucks or any of the others, handled the situation appropriately, would the consumer really have let them have their say? After all, there are millions of consumers on twitter and only a few people tweeting per company. I'm not necessarily defending the corporations - social media is a medium that must become part of communication strategies whether they like it or not. I'm merely wondering if social media users are getting on a bit of a power trip in a way that could be detrimental to the two-way conversation that is so valued in social media.
.-= Katie Charland´s last blog ..You found out over Facebook? =-.

"Consider the career-based motives of Mr. Carroll, I suspect hed have been happy to create a positive video about United, had the $$$ and exposure been sufficient."

But do you think there was any way for United to actually guarantee that exposure? It seems people are a lot more interested in seeing negative responses to brands than positive ones. How often do we see viral videos praising a brand?

Maybe brands should start paying / compensating for positive UGC rather than compensating them after the fact...

Just some thoughts...

Sara @ iGoMogul

@bullseyevideo A Social Media Gun to the Head - PR 2.0 Convince & Convert http://ow.ly/iSo6 //

Reading @jaybaer A Social Media Gun to the Head http://bit.ly/NxrPI 4 & Brand-Saving Recommendations 4 Social Media... http://bit.ly/12HuK3

RT @bullseyevideo: A Social Media Gun to the Head - PR 2.0 Convince & Convert http://ow.ly/iSo6

Companies need to listen and they need to say 'thank you.' It's just good manners.

In the old days, housewives would write to detergent companies and the companies would write back. Nowadays: good luck.

Several times, on my social media channels, I have made a positive mention of a company or service, and though I don't do it to hear back, I confess that I'm a little surprised when I don't. Not even a retweet. I admit, it does impact how much I "sneeze" about them in the future.

Recent case-in-point: a certain company that makes expensive one-cup coffee/tea makers. I was one of their earliest customers, back when they could only be purchased at one online specialty store. I told almost everyone about them -- was a huge fan. I had even given over 10 of them away as gifts -- housewarming or wedding presents, thank you gifts to clients, etc. Wrote the company once to thank them and to offer a suggestion. Never heard back. This happens a lot. Companies need to stop seeing their customers as enemies, and start practicing the same good manners that they hopefully practice in their personal lives.

A Social Media Gun to the Head - PR 2.0 Convince & Convert http://ow.ly/iSo6 #fb

Companies need to listen and they need to say 'thank you.' It's just good manners.

In the old days, housewives would write to detergent companies and the companies would write back. Nowadays: good luck.

Several times, on my social media channels, I have made a positive mention of a company or service, and though I don't do it to hear back, I confess that I'm a little surprised when I don't. Not even a retweet. I admit, it does impact how much I "sneeze" about them in the future.

Recent case-in-point: a certain company that makes expensive one-cup coffee/tea makers. I was one of their earliest customers, back when they could only be purchased at one online specialty store. I told almost everyone about them -- was a huge fan. I had even given over 10 of them away as gifts -- housewarming or wedding presents, thank you gifts to clients, etc. Wrote the company once to thank them and to offer a suggestion. Never heard back. This happens a lot. Companies need to stop seeing their customers as enemies, and start practicing the same good manners that they hopefully practice in their personal lives.

RT @judithw:"Pay me or I will use social media to trash your brain" http://bit.ly/Xyqxz You find the blog post here: http://bit.ly/cULU7

RT @judithw: "Pay me or I will use social media to trash your brain" http://bit.ly/Xyqxz You find the blog post here: http://bit.ly/cULU7

"Pay me or I will use social media to trash your brain" http://bit.ly/Xyqxz You find the blog post here: http://bit.ly/cULU7

A Social Media Gun to the Head - PR 2.0 Convince & Convert http://ow.ly/iSo6

I was not aware of this story. I'm glad you posted it here. It's a great example of how social media can be leveraged both positively and negatively. I of course this it's rude and shallow for someone to manipulate the reputation of any company for their own personal gain. However, this should serve as a message to companies everywhere how powerful this media is and that they will ignore it at only their own peril. It's not fair, but it's the way it is.
.-= Christian´s last blog ..How to Use Twitter Professionally =-.

I was not aware of this story. I'm glad you posted it here. It's a great example of how social media can be leveraged both positively and negatively. I of course this it's rude and shallow for someone to manipulate the reputation of any company for their own personal gain. However, this should serve as a message to companies everywhere how powerful this media is and that they will ignore it at only their own peril. It's not fair, but it's the way it is.
.-= Christian´s last blog ..How to Use Twitter Professionally =-.

A Social Media Gun to the Head http://bit.ly/19Qyu4

Is the customer ALWAYS right? "A Social Media Gun to the Head" http://ow.ly/hN0Q (via @jaybaer)

Good post. Interesting perspective.

“holding companies for ransom’ and Will we see customer service deficiencies blown out of proportion (or even faked) in an effort to extort “make good” concessions from brands? caught my attention. This would be as opposed to companies blowing claims of their product out of proportion, or buying stealth bloggers, or posting stealth testimonials (from their employees) on their own site in order to ‘extort’ revenues from unsuspecting customers?

I think what’s missed in your dialogue about Dave Carroll is the role of the customer in creating a brand’s story. Or creating a new chapter with the content provided by the brand. And the lack of control a brand, even as all-powerful as United may have thought themselves, has now. United created this story as much as Dave Carroll. United was co-creator of Dave’s video.

Maybe, David will give co-producer credit to United for his album. He should. They provided the inspiration and much of the story line for Dave to share.

And they did it to others, flight after late flight, surly service after surly service. The only issue is why there aren’t more stories like Dave’s surfacing. Or more albums being sold with help from a brand like United.

Brands like United forget they now are co-producers in our stories. They contribute elements of our story we share with others.

United’s brand isn’t built with clever ads or marketing messages. It’s built with customer interactions, customer service, customer happiness, customer word-of-mouth. It’s built with the customer, not in spite of. ( Or in United’s case, some might say despite their customers. )
.-= Zane Safrit´s last blog ..Advertisers: do you see your disconnect here? =-.

Good post. Interesting perspective.

“holding companies for ransom’ and Will we see customer service deficiencies blown out of proportion (or even faked) in an effort to extort “make good” concessions from brands? caught my attention. This would be as opposed to companies blowing claims of their product out of proportion, or buying stealth bloggers, or posting stealth testimonials (from their employees) on their own site in order to ‘extort’ revenues from unsuspecting customers?

I think what’s missed in your dialogue about Dave Carroll is the role of the customer in creating a brand’s story. Or creating a new chapter with the content provided by the brand. And the lack of control a brand, even as all-powerful as United may have thought themselves, has now. United created this story as much as Dave Carroll. United was co-creator of Dave’s video.

Maybe, David will give co-producer credit to United for his album. He should. They provided the inspiration and much of the story line for Dave to share.

And they did it to others, flight after late flight, surly service after surly service. The only issue is why there aren’t more stories like Dave’s surfacing. Or more albums being sold with help from a brand like United.

Brands like United forget they now are co-producers in our stories. They contribute elements of our story we share with others.

United’s brand isn’t built with clever ads or marketing messages. It’s built with customer interactions, customer service, customer happiness, customer word-of-mouth. It’s built with the customer, not in spite of. ( Or in United’s case, some might say despite their customers. )
.-= Zane Safrit´s last blog ..Advertisers: do you see your disconnect here? =-.

Interesting Post.

Incidentally I got to know about the United Airlines incident a couple of hours back only and saw how Dave cleverly used Social Media to claim compensation with the video(s) but to be honest It doesn't seem like a clear cut case of brandjacking, as firstly his complaint was valid(airlines acknowledged it), secondly he made the video after 9 months of running from pillar to post for compensation, thirdly he didn't demand a lot of money or something more than what he deserved
.-= Mayank Dhingra´s last blog ..Rickshaw Road Shows =-.

Interesting Post.

Incidentally I got to know about the United Airlines incident a couple of hours back only and saw how Dave cleverly used Social Media to claim compensation with the video(s) but to be honest It doesn't seem like a clear cut case of brandjacking, as firstly his complaint was valid(airlines acknowledged it), secondly he made the video after 9 months of running from pillar to post for compensation, thirdly he didn't demand a lot of money or something more than what he deserved
.-= Mayank Dhingra´s last blog ..Rickshaw Road Shows =-.

Funny, but not once did I think about Carroll holding United for ransom while I was watching that video. If they did all the things he claim they did, they definitely deserved that video imo.

Totally agree with taking the conversation offline though.

For some good examples of letting the community defend you, check out Dell's Social Media for Small Business page on Facebook. Their discussion forums are full of people posting very negative comments about Dell, and for the most part their fans defend them in droves.

I know everyone says that the beauty of social media is that it is giving the consumer a voice in what used to be a one-way conversation - business to consumer. However, social media is really the turf of the consumer and companies are never going to have the home court advantage. I wonder had United, Starbucks or any of the others, handled the situation appropriately, would the consumer really have let them have their say? After all, there are millions of consumers on twitter and only a few people tweeting per company. I'm not necessarily defending the corporations - social media is a medium that must become part of communication strategies whether they like it or not. I'm merely wondering if social media users are getting on a bit of a power trip in a way that could be detrimental to the two-way conversation that is so valued in social media.
.-= Katie Charland´s last blog ..“You found out over Facebook?” =-.

WOW! That's my immediate response. I first came across Dave Carroll's video on Alan Wolk's blog (his post: Don't Suck) and was amazed at what United had done (okay, well not really). But, to find out that it was something that happened over a year ago stuns me...and if he did put together the video to further his career, I just think that's a jerk move that tarnishes social media and his credibility (If he even cares about that. Some folks just want the fame/fortune.).

That said, I just wrote a post about a consumer experience I recently had with a local museum. I wasn't looking to tarnish their brand (I gave them a great, but not excellent review), but to let them know it's the little things that they need to be aware of and fix so that visitors can have a great/excellent experience each and every time. [Your post makes me feel a little bit guilty...okay, not really. ;-) ]

On the flip side, during BlogPotomac my Dell laptop decided to give me the blue screen of death during the conference. I was frazzled to say the least. Immediately people were like "go on Twitter, get Richard!" And I thought...no, I am not going to do that. I called customer service instead and they fixed my laptop in a jiffy. Why make a fuss online? It's not always the best course of action.

The difference between these two consumer experiences? I have a relationship with Richard at Dell and I didn't want to hassle him with something I knew customer support could fix (even though he was more than happy to help, which I found out later because someone who saw me stressing out tweeted him on my behalf). I don't have a relationship with the local museum...

But am I the average consumer? No. I analyze my personal consumer experiences as a marketer.

We can't expect the average consumer (i.e. non-marketers) to not use social media to their advantage. But those who do get it might want to think twice about participating "in the tsunami of real-time public opinion" next time something happens. Or, at the least, put on our "journalist" hats and do some fact checking before diving into the tsunami.

Thanks for the eye-opener Jason, it's timely and thought provoking.

Beth Harte@bethharte
Community Manager, MarketingProfs

I believe there are a couple of significant errors dealing with Dave Carroll's intentions. First, the reason that the video didn't premiere until nearly a year after United broke his guitar (a contention that they never denied) was that United took 9 months to issue their final decree denying any restitution. Second, Carroll did not create the video to advance his music career but to illuminate United's neglect and casual indifference. The viral success of the video and Carroll's bookings was an unintended consequence, not his primary goal. In fact, one of the reasons for the video's success is its authenticity. Carroll's humor, facile storytelling and hook-laden tune are what made his video a success, not a gun to United's head. United has no one to blame but themselves for their execrable behavior and anemic response.
.-= John Heaney´s last blog ..What if The Four Seasons Ran Your Business? =-.

I think I agree with Bing that customers have felt powerless in the face of poor customer service for so long that they are jumping on social media to regain some sense of empowerment.

I also agree that if a company is going to play in the social media park, they have to get in the game. That is, I think they have to respond. And not only in crisis situations.

Last week I blogged about the Philadelphia Phillies at http://awriterrambles.blogspot.com. The Phils are on Facebook and Twitter posting away, but they never respond to fans' posts on either outlet. Fans were recently annoyed about a recent acquisition, and the team kept posting about how great this deal was, ignoring the fans' reaction.

Now, of course the team is and will go ahead and do when they think is best, whatever the fans think. But I think if you have a social media staff person, they need to respond now and then, not just keep pumping out the company line.

"Consider the career-based motives of Mr. Carroll, I suspect he’d have been happy to create a positive video about United, had the $$$ and exposure been sufficient."

But do you think there was any way for United to actually guarantee that exposure? It seems people are a lot more interested in seeing negative responses to brands than positive ones. How often do we see viral videos praising a brand?

Maybe brands should start paying / compensating for positive UGC rather than compensating them after the fact...

Just some thoughts...

Sara @ iGoMogul

Sadly I think we'll see more consumers/customers using/abusing social media to take up crusades (tad dramatic - sorry!). It's the natural progression from us making it easy to put people in the spotlight.

The key point is that perception of the complaint is seen properly by the public. What you see with things like United Airlines and the recent Best Buy CMO argument (which I discuss in my last post) is that often the complaint was either too late, or had been dealt with satisfactorily in-store.

To then open it up afterward seems to be more a personal mission to draw attention to yourself, as opposed to the original problem.

I may be too cynical here, but it's how it can be perceived. No wonder brands are scared of social media when we often invite them in just to be bullied.
.-= Danny Brown´s last blog ..Are You Abusing Your Social Media Voice? =-.

Funny, but not once did I think about Carroll holding United for ransom while I was watching that video. If they did all the things he claim they did, they definitely deserved that video imo.

Totally agree with taking the conversation offline though.

For some good examples of letting the community defend you, check out Dell's Social Media for Small Business page on Facebook. Their discussion forums are full of people posting very negative comments about Dell, and for the most part their fans defend them in droves.

Just wanted to make a correction - I didn't receive cash for repairs to the dulcimer, rather a $200 voucher for future flight on Delta/Northwest. Northwest adamantly refused to pay for the damage, yet were concerned about my perception of the entire event.

Whereas I see your point about a rash of claims by people who feel wronged, I feel that large companies have been making the customer jump through hoops for far too long when they've been wronged. Maybe Carroll's aim was to get a career boost. My aim was to be repaid for damages that weren't my fault. If social media gives the consumer extra leverage for justice, what's wrong with that? Maybe it will cause companies to review their customer service policies.

Cheers,

Bing Futch

it definitely gives some brands pause - we find that prospects and clients structured for traditional marketing frequently have to be convinced that engaging in social media is a good idea. And much of their fear and trepidation is due to the horror stories. Companies in a defensive posture (I must defend my turf, my brand, my reputation, my processes) always need the most encouragement, I think because they're primarily concerned about not losing share. It's a corporate culture thing and those wheels of change turn slowly.

Alex Fortney@alexfortney
Networked Insights

.-= Alex Fortney´s last blog ..Make Sense of Internet Chatter About Brands =-.

I know everyone says that the beauty of social media is that it is giving the consumer a voice in what used to be a one-way conversation - business to consumer. However, social media is really the turf of the consumer and companies are never going to have the home court advantage. I wonder had United, Starbucks or any of the others, handled the situation appropriately, would the consumer really have let them have their say? After all, there are millions of consumers on twitter and only a few people tweeting per company. I'm not necessarily defending the corporations - social media is a medium that must become part of communication strategies whether they like it or not. I'm merely wondering if social media users are getting on a bit of a power trip in a way that could be detrimental to the two-way conversation that is so valued in social media.
.-= Katie Charland´s last blog ..“You found out over Facebook?” =-.

When I went to see Harry Potter over the weekend, the woman sitting behind me complained to her husband several times that the theater was too crowded and that she didn't like her seat. Before the trailers even started, they'd left the theater after her husband promised that he'd "get their money back if I complain loud enough."

The way that people interact with brands online reminds me of that couple. Like you, I've complained about a brand in part just to gauge the response.

I'm not sure whether disgruntled entitlement on the part of customers is worse than what I perceive as brands routinely ignoring social users that aren't "influencers," but pampering the ones that are. "We're responsive to some concerns," the message seems to read, "but not yours." Of course, that's a bit of an ouroboros.

I do think that brands in the social space should be responsive to complaints, just to show the user that they're listening (which is probably one of the things the plaintiff here is looking for, anyway). Not with a handout or with free stuff, but with an apology or acknowledgment and a non-rote answer to their question or problem.
.-= Jeff Stolarcyk´s last blog ..Cover Your Ears For A Second =-.

It's going to be a big problem if a customer can do tens of thousands in damage to a company because he was to lazy to take them to court to get payment for damage to his guitar. I wouldn't be surprised if this resulted in a new set of libel/defamation laws that address the medium.
.-= Josh´s last blog ..Logic. =-.

WOW! That's my immediate response. I first came across Dave Carroll's video on Alan Wolk's blog (his post: Don't Suck) and was amazed at what United had done (okay, well not really). But, to find out that it was something that happened over a year ago stuns me...and if he did put together the video to further his career, I just think that's a jerk move that tarnishes social media and his credibility (If he even cares about that. Some folks just want the fame/fortune.).

That said, I just wrote a post about a consumer experience I recently had with a local museum. I wasn't looking to tarnish their brand (I gave them a great, but not excellent review), but to let them know it's the little things that they need to be aware of and fix so that visitors can have a great/excellent experience each and every time. [Your post makes me feel a little bit guilty...okay, not really. ;-) ]

On the flip side, during BlogPotomac my Dell laptop decided to give me the blue screen of death during the conference. I was frazzled to say the least. Immediately people were like "go on Twitter, get Richard!" And I thought...no, I am not going to do that. I called customer service instead and they fixed my laptop in a jiffy. Why make a fuss online? It's not always the best course of action.

The difference between these two consumer experiences? I have a relationship with Richard at Dell and I didn't want to hassle him with something I knew customer support could fix (even though he was more than happy to help, which I found out later because someone who saw me stressing out tweeted him on my behalf). I don't have a relationship with the local museum...

But am I the average consumer? No. I analyze my personal consumer experiences as a marketer.

We can't expect the average consumer (i.e. non-marketers) to not use social media to their advantage. But those who do get it might want to think twice about participating "in the tsunami of real-time public opinion" next time something happens. Or, at the least, put on our "journalist" hats and do some fact checking before diving into the tsunami.

Thanks for the eye-opener Jason, it's timely and thought provoking.

Beth Harte@bethharte
Community Manager, MarketingProfs