Social Media And Customer Service – When Do You Criticize Publicly?
It’s very easy for a company to quickly fall victim to online criticism. An accusation of illegal activity, or even just bad customer service, can quickly go viral. It seems that social media criticism is the first method used when there’s a problem, rather than contacting another company directly. A public outcry can provoke a rapid response, but is it the most professional way of going about things? What’s the relationship between social media and customer service?
Immediately escalating the issue
An interesting story this week was Google Kenya’s improper access of the database of a local company, Mocality. Google workers used Mocality’s business directory to try and sell a competing service to Kenyan businesses.
This issue became a big story because Mocality set up a “sting” operation to gather a lot of data and proof about Google’s activities in Kenya. After collecting all this information, they wrote an extensive blog post detailing the issue, and that post subsequently spread across social media before being picked up by traditional press.
Mocality apparently didn’t choose to contact Google directly regarding the issue. They also didn’t contact the local authorities (given that their allegations were about illegal practices). They took a social media route to make their allegations and spread them as widely as possible. It caused a lot of criticism of Google, a quick response from that company admitting the malpractice by their Kenyan team, an apology to Mocality and a promise to immediately investigate the issue further. A win for Mocality.
Public allegations vs private queries
If I have an issue with a company then my first thought is to contact them directly. The Mocality situation is an extreme example, but even if it’s merely a case of poor customer service the idea of contacting customer support directly seems to be becoming less common. It’s common to see widespread Twitter or Facebook memes highlighting poor customer service or other unfortunate activities by companies; forcing them to respond to a public outcry.
There are advantages to acting in this way.
- A widespread public outcry forces the offending company to respond
- It provides an opportunity for other people who’ve had similar problems to speak with a single voice
- The public nature of the criticism often forces a company to provide greater recompense so that they’re seen to be taking the problem seriously
There’s also a downside.
- A genuine accident or oversight can become “proof” of deliberate action
- The seriousness of an issue can become extremely exaggerated or inaccurate
- A company can become tarred for something outside of their direct control (the action of an individual, the behavior of a subsidiary, etc)
Gossip as a means of provoking action
Social media provides an opportunity to gossip on a global scale. I know that a strong allegation, particularly against a big company (because people always like taking big names down a notch!), can get a lot of traction online. It seems to me, however, that social media is a good avenue to redress problems if a company doesn’t respond to a direct communication effectively.
If I receive poor customer service from Amazon, then my first task is going to be contacting Amazon and attempting to resolve the issue. If Amazon deal poorly with my customer support request, then I might start talking about my bad experience through social media.
Social media is incredibly powerful in giving consumers a wider voice, and ensuring that their concerns and difficulties can be escalated. Should that come after other avenues have been exhausted, or is social media a legitimate first choice when demanding a response from another company?
If you enjoyed this post, why not subscribe to receive all the latest stories from Shiny Toy Robots?
