To Respond or Not to Respond to Online Criticism, That is the Question
It’s interesting how issues seem to come at you in waves. Some are like rolling thunder beginning as far back as you can see from the shore. Others are like sneaker waves, crashing over you and knocking you down with full force. Over the last several days I’ve been engulfed by the topic of whether brands should respond to online criticism no matter who leverages it. And as I started to poke around, it appears the topic seems to be on the tip of everyone else’s lips as well.
In the post Responding to an Online Critic: Get your Timing, Target, and Tone Right , Shabbir Imber Safdar and Jason Alcorn discuss their opinions on whether or not to respond to bloggers who are critical of your company or products. They claim that by giving visibility to little known bloggers and naysayers–by responding to them at all or by linking to their posts in your response–you are providing the blogger unwarranted visibility and credibility. They lambast Richard Edelman for not only the outpoken way he challenged Jason Calacanis’ assessment of PR as unnecessary, but for the mere fact that he addressed this criticism at all. They suggest Edelman should have simply let the issue lie, where it would wither and die on the proverbial vine of old news.
In contrast to this, the popular marketing webzine Marketing Sherpa published an article titled How to Practice Defensive Branding: 6 Key Factors to Build Credibility, Swat Bad Buzz which articulates their point of view on how and when companies should respond to online criticism. Their’s is a much more proactive approach, suggesting that brands mitigate the risk of landing the role of online punching bag by:
- Building trust
- Ensuring company behaviors match espoused values (like buying green power if you say you’re a green company)
- Being authentic and transparent
- Listening and responding
This issue also rose its head at the Blogworld Conference I attended and spoke at a couple weeks ago. In one of the panels featuring my fellow Intel colleague (and Conversations Matter founder) Michael Brito, Ted Murphy of Izea asked whether corporate brands had policies to respond to critics who throw arrows at the brand in their blogs or on discussion threads. Valuable questions were raised on whether a corporate brand should respond to what traditional media might consider “small-time bloggers” or employ the “ignore them and they’ll go away” approach.
I can tell you that this issue is hotly debated within the walls here at Intel. There are often good reasons why company employees cannot comment on certain topics or threads, for instance if the topic discusses an issue that is currently under litigation. And yes, there are also times when it is best not to feed the trolls [I got that phrase from my friend and co-founder of Slashdot Jeff Bates] under the bridge who seem to make it their lifelong purpose to discredit certain companies through their vitriolic diatribes of negativity.
For the most part, however, I believe that all criticism is generally good criticism if used by companies correctly. And in the online world, where all content typically lives on infinitum, today’s small-time blog may just become tomorrow’s Huffington Post. Ignore it at your own risk. In addition–and pay attention because this is the nugget here–companies who respond to detractors by showing that they listen, respond, and take action based on customer feedback are likely to win them over as some of their most adoring fans. This has happened time and again, most recently on Intel’s IT Community site where community manager Josh Hilliker won over a naysayer by engaging with him and responding to his criticism. That blogger now blogs for Intel on that site and drives traffic to the community from his own blog.
|
Email This Page
Did you enjoy this post? If so, please subscribe to our RSS feed
Tuesday, September 30th, 2008 at 3:23 pm
I agree with you. What companies fail to take into mind is that even though I may be a small blogger, in the real world I could know many, many people.
Plus, if I criticize you and you actually respond and fix the issue, you just landed another loyal customer.
Tuesday, September 30th, 2008 at 3:27 pm
While it’s certainly a debate that won’t be settled overnight, I think brands would be better served if they approach it on a case by case basis to keep their options open. Savvy companies should give themselves the freedom to participate as needed.
Tuesday, September 30th, 2008 at 4:02 pm
I had an experience with Fathead where they found me dissatisfied with their product, and they contacted me after reading my small time blog post. I would think they are smart to be proactive on this. http://jvreagan.blogspot.com/2008/05/happy-ending-i-hope-to-my-fathead-story.html
Tuesday, September 30th, 2008 at 4:58 pm
I think companies/brands should respond, but they they should avoid being defensive and they should do so strategically with a view to changing the criticism to something positive. Would they not respond if it was praise rather than criticism? The silence from companies in the conversation that’s currently taking place is deafening. I wrote a post on this very topic which you can check out here and I’ve also listed some tips marketers could consider.
http://nickyjameson.com/2008/09/24/how-to-use-social-media-to-change-whats-said-about-your-brand/
Only worrying if the writer is a “big-time blogger” is a big mistake… as Lisa’s point indicates. Companies should be monitoring all that’s said about them… it’s easy enough to do. And then they should have a plan for responding in such a way that will create brand advocates. That will do more to boost their credibility than any a-list blogger.
Tuesday, September 30th, 2008 at 9:47 pm
from my vantage point I agree that all feedback is good feedback, seriously the fact that they invest the time to write a blog/article that goes after a piece of the technology is worthy of a response. The fundamental difference is in the approach of the past vs. today. In the past you would contact the source and have a discussion/dialogue about the technology, educate and then close on the topic. Today’s new reality is that when an article get’s posted it is now out there on the mighty blogosphere, the response (timing, tone, etc..) is very important, if not answered it becomes a comment potentially giving truth to the comment, if answered it draws attention. basically there’s no win-win here that most see, I think there’s a win when you can convert a non-believer into a believer. when you can share the knowledge everybody wins.. fortunately one of the threads that Kelly mentions is in my domain (yah my backyard), and the big question is not when will we respond (that’s done) but how we will educate the blogosphere on our answer.
Wednesday, October 1st, 2008 at 7:22 am
First off, greatly complemented for the feeding the trolls line. I think that this is a good discussion have because as both the piece and reader response points out, its not just about the brand management in the larger sense, but also about being able to talk directly to the customer base — paying or not paying.
I think that the most important differentiation to keep in mind is not one of “big blog/news outlet” vs. “small blog” but the intent behind the message. There are some people who are going to be negative in their views of a company, but are ultimately rational actors, to steal an economic theory term. The trolls, as I like to call them, are people who seemingly have nothing better to do then suck up time spent talking to them and employ a number of different techniques to consume more time. It’s really a gut call as to which is which — but when it comes to your time, the time of people working on a site or company making the right gut call is critical — because engaging in a time sink discussion with a troll who will never be convinced versus responding to 20 rational actors… Well, the time efficiency speaks for itself.
And that’s why having good tools to watch who people are on your own site and on other sites, doing your research.
Wednesday, October 1st, 2008 at 5:30 pm
James - I think that company had the right approach. I wonder if companies are aware that many people make buying decisions based on the conversations about the company. Before I purchase a product now I type company name + customer service, or product name into Google. Then I read the conversations, not just to see what people are saying, reviews etc and to see what they recommend but to see if/how the company has responded to what’s being said. I’ve avoided several disappointments, made smart purchases (sometimes at the competition) and spent a considerable amount by doing that. I don’t recall any of the blogs or sources being big time bloggers either.