Submit Your Article
ManagerNewz DirectoryResponding To Online Criticism
By Kelly Feller
Expert Author
Article Date: 2008-10-01
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
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.
Comments
About the Author:
A savvy marketing chick and professional writer for over 15 years, Kelly Ripley Feller is a social media addict and outspoken proponent of change and marketing evolution. She has worked with a variety of technology companies including Intel, Hewlett Packard, Microsoft, Intuit, SAS Software, Symantec, and IBM. Today she manages social media programs for Intel and writes about social media, marketing, business, Second Life, and politics, including a column on social media and politics for a literary magazine. She is also a contributing writer for ConversationsMatter.org.
