In late September an iPhone 6 Plus user alleged that his phone got deformed in his front pocket shortly after the new model was released. As the allegation went viral, social media was flooded with memes that saw global brands contributing to the iPhone 6 ‘#bendgate saga’.
As these jokes made their way to newspapers, websites and TV shows; more and more community managers began looking for opportunities to be humorous online.
In an era where brands are struggling to appear human online, many have resorted to humour and conversational posts. Nobody wants to feel like they are interacting with a robot, and brands want to create an emotional connection with their clients.
Where do brands draw the line?
But the big question is: where do brands draw the line?
Humour is a thin line, and it is easy to cross. A little humour and comparative advertising never hurt anyone, right? Wrong, especially when social media managers guard their online communities like their progeny.
A prime example of this is the online spat between Naked Pizza and Domino’s Pizza that took place last week. A Domino’s Pizza customer posted a public complaint about a delayed pizza delivery.
Naked Pizza picked it up and urged the disgruntled customer to try their services.
This initial post garnered a few retweets and soon after Naked Pizza posted a follow up tweet about why Domino’s Pizza delivery were delayed.
The image depicted an ‘‘obese’’ pizza delivery man donning Domino’s Pizza gear atop a delivery bike.
In that one tweet, they took the joke too far. It was no longer about the brand attributes or product comparison — it became about the people. In this case they made a direct hit at an ‘‘obese’’ rider.
Nobody likes a bully.
By making derisory comments about the rider’s body, they donned the bully hat and fell out of favour with the social media community.
Mud-slinging doesn’t make anyone cleaner.
As social media users put Naked Pizza on the spot over their derogatory comments, the account manager tried to deflect blame. They alleged that Domino’s Pizza was playing dirty by trying to poach their staff.
They attempted to use the age old excuse that the competition did it first therefore their reaction was justified. What they failed to recognise is that by slinging mud, they got dirty too.
It is a free market. Nobody blocks the competition from head-hunting, but one can retain their staff by giving better offers and drumming up employee loyalty. One could wonder if their reaction is indicative of their lack of adequate investment in the staff.
While tweets came streaming in on the abrasive comments, Domino’s Pizza remained mum to the public chatter. They only responded to the unhappy client who triggered the ‘‘tweef’’ by apologising for the delayed delivery.
Their subsequent social media conversation centered on their products and interactions with their clients. In doing so, they exemplified one of the cardinal rules of prudent social media management: prudence.
While the conversation was in their favour, they decided not to add their voice to the discussion. Instead they let the community come to their defence.
To reply, or not to reply?
This brings to the fore the question of responses: should brands respond to every comment directed to them on social media? How do they deal with situations where one comment triggers an avalanche of negative responses?
Brands need to clearly define what kind of conversations they chose to take part in. For example: a brand could say that they will apologise to an unhappy client about poor service but they will not respond to people who join the conversation with an aim of trolling.
Effective social media management calls for one to think like a chess master. A social media manager ought to anticipate how the community would respond to their post. Many a times silence is the most powerful tool when you are faced with trolls.
An honest apology does the trick. When the avalanche of negative comments came streaming in, Naked Pizza’s CEO Ritesh Doshi apologised publicly.
He acknowledged that they had upset people and that their tweets were unacceptable. Instead of deflecting the blame to the person handling the account, he assumed full responsibility and even apologised to Domino’s Pizza.
Brands make mistakes
Shortly after his apology, the online conversation changed. Tweeters, who had been hurling salvos at the brand, began to applaud the CEO for his stand.
Often, brands forget that they too can make mistakes. When they own up and apologise without blaming others, they open the door to redemption.
In June 2014 Johnson & Johnson launched a social campaign named ‘‘Our Promise’’ in response to concerns that some of the ingredients they use in making baby products are unsafe.
Instead of unleashing a panel of professors and studies to defend their case, the global company opted to listen and change the ingredients.
In the YouTube video, they reiterated their promise to create safe products for children because they too are parents. Their contrite position was met with a fresh wave of brand loyalty and respect.
This OPED was initially published on Business Daily.
jchelagat.com 