The comments following blog posts and other online content can help build or break a brand as they, like the posts themselves, help influence the way we think about people and companies. And, as many of you know, there’s a common feature on most sites that helps you keep track of reader comments after you submit one of your own. Before submitting a comment, simply click a box and from now on you’ll receive an e-mail update every time someone else leaves feedback on the same post.
None of this is new, but until very recently I never put the two together and considered the full PR implications of the e-mail update feature. It hit home during a recent conversation with a blogger friend of mine.
During our conversation, he mentioned that a story he had published ages ago about a company had unexpectedly become a forum for the company’s disgruntled customers. It was months later, he said, and people were still posting angry comments bashing the featured company. The worst part was that every time someone posted a new nastygram, an e-mail update was sent to all those who had opted in to receive them. My friend said there were nearly 100 comments and that number was growing every day.
There may be a time limit for receiving these e-mail updates, but I’m not aware of one. Even so, there is still a fairly large window of time for disgruntled readers to have a profound impact on a brand, especially if folks are posting dozens of negative comments that are then sent by e-mail to other commentors.
What can a brand do to help resolve the problem?
As far as I know, there is no way for commentors to opt out of the e-mail updates once they have opted in, which means that even if a commentor wants to stop receiving e-mail updates, he may not be able to prevent them from coming. While that may present a PR nightmare for a brand, especially if most of the comments are negative, there are some things a company or individual can do to address readers’ concerns and help resolve the problem. Below are a few rules of engagement.
- First, decide if a comment responding to reader complaints is warranted. In some cases, it might be best to stay on the sidelines and avoid any interactions that could potentially make things worse.
- If a response is warranted, make it apparent in your comment that you represent the brand. Never hide your identity or affiliation.
- State the facts. If there is a misunderstanding among those commenting about your brand, it’s appropriate to politely set the record straight with the facts.
- If your brand has caused a problem that is generating angry comments, it is best to acknowledge the problem and let others know what you are doing to fix it. It’s best to be clear and concise.
- Never engage in an online argument! State the facts politely, offer helpful information and then walk away.
- Most importantly, always be respectful to your audience and other commentors.
These rules of thumb should help mitigate a problem and it’s important to note that they apply regardless of whether or not there is an e-mail update option.
If there is, however, the major benefit is that it is a good way to send your carefully crafted response to many of those who have previously left comments and opted in to receive e-mail updates.
Please note that while the above rules of engagement are generally good guidelines to follow, every case is different. So, you will need to use your judgment as to whether or not engagement is the best course of action.
What guidelines do you follow when engaging with online communities?
Photo Credit: Yu^2
{ 2 comments… read them below or add one }
Kevin,
Really solid advice for brands. If I could add something…
This kind of situation can actually be a revenue generating/cost reducing opportunity for the brand, despite the sort of panic it can create.
What a negative comment free-for-all represents is the fact that a brand’s product or service — for lack of a better word — sucks. So, to find oneself in this position represents an opportunity to make the product better. It’s free product insight, a web-based focus group. It’s certainly a bitter pill to swallow but it can, indeed, yield a better product. Which, if transparently created and executed, can turn public sentiment around and generate revenue.
Keep those tips coming! Brands need to be listening to this kind of valuable information because too often they don’t get the “digital mind.”
Excellent point, Brad! Thanks for your comment and I couldn’t agree more with your assessment: “What a negative comment free-for-all represents is the fact that a brand’s product or service — for lack of a better word — sucks.” If a brand can listen to its customers and change its product for the better, everybody wins.