a few of my followers know that years ago, i managed a rock n' roll band, thinking that it'd be a good way of combining fun and profit. after too much of the former and not nearly enough of the latter, i came to my senses and decided to pursue slightly more lucrative, if somewhat less melodius, work -- work which, it turned out, involved a fair amount of air travel and being subject to the poor customer service of the airlines. i think perhaps the soft spot i still have in my heart for musicians, coupled with my glee that finally an airline is being taken to task over its bad treatment of customers, are combining to keep me absolutely glued to the amazing social media frenzy that is the story of dave carroll and united breaks guitars.
(see video, right)
unless you've been under the same rock you might have been under during the susan boyle craze, you've probably heard about this. dave carroll, a musician travelling between halifax and nebraska, saw united airlines baggage handlers at o'hare tossing around his guitar and other equipment. he says his $3600 taylor guitar was broken as a result, and that united gave him the runaround for a year on his claim for damages. he finally had the guitar repaired for $1200 at his own expense, and decided he'd tell the world his story via a series of songs & videos.
his goal was to get 1 million youtube views in a year. this first video in the series was posted 4 days ago and he's already got nearly 1.5 million views and 15,000 comments, the vast majority of which are along the lines of "you go, dave!"
it should be noted that dave's is not nearly the first video to dis united. there are, in fact, several videos about the airlines treatment of musical instruments, which collectively have a few hundred views, and another regarding a bad travel day for a decidedly offbeat individual who goes by the name of nutcheese that's racked up nearly 50,000 views. so why all this mania now?
one of the things you learn when you're a band manager is that people would rather hear a hooky little tune a thousand times than some other songs even once. and dave's song is as hooky as they get, which is why after you've heard it once you can't get it out of your head until you hear something else equally hooky, say, like the pants song.
also, unlike nutcheese, dave is not a nut case. he is, however, quite possibly a test case. the social media bloggers have been all over this one, with a variety of points of view. my favorite conversation so far, i think, has got to be the one on seth simond's blog, where seth basically makes the assertion that dave could be fibbing, didn't follow united's established rules for reporting the damage, and suggests that it's not right that an individual can hijack social media to take a company to task in this way. he had a few folks agree with him (i wasn't one of them), suggesting that the situation points up the need for pr and communications folks to plan in advance how to handle these occurrences. many seemed to think (again, i'm not one of them) that united should have responded with a funny video of its own vs. caving to the pressure.
why my opposite point of view? because in my mind, united was playing hooky, too, but in a different way. they were nowhere on this subject -- that is, anywhere but engaging with their unhappy customer -- for a year. and when they did finally engage, they chose to avoid all responsibility. perhaps, as i pointed out in my comments to seth, if they had done something ... ANYTHING ... to help dave with the problem, he wouldn't have been so motivated to create the song. dave says as much in his write-up about the debacle.
now united says they're wanting to use this as an internal training vehicle. i can't help but wonder if that means they'll be training their agents to ask things like "are you a musician?" "can you sing?" "do you plan to use social media to fry us if we don't help you?" vs. really empowering people to do the right thing and put the customer first ... or at least, not leave him alone on the hook.
Showing posts with label social media. Show all posts
Showing posts with label social media. Show all posts
Friday, July 10, 2009
Friday, June 26, 2009
citizen reporting

i wish i could take credit for the term "citizen reporting," but i actually saw it in this youtube blog post. a pretty interesting thing, this bit about apple's 3g iphone intro causing youtube mobile vid posts to increase so dramatically literally overnight.
there've been numerous examples of cr, mostly i think having to do with twitter and the tweets that people sent following the bombings in mumbai, the usair landing in the hudson and of course the
recent tweets on the unrest following elections in iran. the implications for crisis communications, i think, are unbelievably important.
what does "citizen reporting" mean for communications professionals?
1) your job is 24/7. i know, a big "duh." this was always the case, but now even moreso because "news" is going to be transmitted from the initial moments of an event, quite possibly even before your comms people in the location know what's happening. is it possible for twitter to send an actual alarm bell to your blackberry to wake you up in the middle of the night when something happens to your company in europe or asia? (tell all your developer friends there's srlsy big $ in an app for this).
2) your involvement is critical. maybe another big "duh" ... but i wonder how many comms folks have yet to incorporate social media into their formerly-well-designed crisis plans? if not you, someone needs to be designated to tweet into the stream with credible info. a situation where individuals are writing "there are hundreds of dead bodies here!" when in fact casualties may not yet have been confirmed can be incredibly damaging and work at cross-purposes to your crisis comms efforts. you need a private channel and a public channel, and need to ensure that you transfer the right info from one to the other as the situation unfolds.
3) your brand is on the line. companies' reputations -- and often their stock prices -- can sink dramatically with poor handling of a crisis. pre-social media, it was easier to manage the coverage, either by making phone calls to reporters in advance of bad news, or avoiding their calls when they checked to confirm. that's no longer an option. there are likely to be numerous sources, all of whom have an up-close-and-personal view of the situation, who may speak as experts simply because they're there and will write what they see. but as we all know, proximity is not the only (nor necessarily the most important) factor in determining the truth. a person who's unconscious may appear to be a fatality to someone who's not a medical professional...yet, i think the tweeter still is unlikely to rephrase as "there are hundreds of unconscious people here!"
some pr folks are looking down their noses at twitter, saying "it's a fad, it won't last, i don't need to worry about it"... but i wish they'd think again. if we could learn how to use this technology to get a step ahead of crisis situations and other similar events, it could be a real boon to our companies, and the public, both of whom deserve the best info and our best efforts to get it to them quickly.
there've been numerous examples of cr, mostly i think having to do with twitter and the tweets that people sent following the bombings in mumbai, the usair landing in the hudson and of course the
recent tweets on the unrest following elections in iran. the implications for crisis communications, i think, are unbelievably important.
what does "citizen reporting" mean for communications professionals?
1) your job is 24/7. i know, a big "duh." this was always the case, but now even moreso because "news" is going to be transmitted from the initial moments of an event, quite possibly even before your comms people in the location know what's happening. is it possible for twitter to send an actual alarm bell to your blackberry to wake you up in the middle of the night when something happens to your company in europe or asia? (tell all your developer friends there's srlsy big $ in an app for this).
2) your involvement is critical. maybe another big "duh" ... but i wonder how many comms folks have yet to incorporate social media into their formerly-well-designed crisis plans? if not you, someone needs to be designated to tweet into the stream with credible info. a situation where individuals are writing "there are hundreds of dead bodies here!" when in fact casualties may not yet have been confirmed can be incredibly damaging and work at cross-purposes to your crisis comms efforts. you need a private channel and a public channel, and need to ensure that you transfer the right info from one to the other as the situation unfolds.
3) your brand is on the line. companies' reputations -- and often their stock prices -- can sink dramatically with poor handling of a crisis. pre-social media, it was easier to manage the coverage, either by making phone calls to reporters in advance of bad news, or avoiding their calls when they checked to confirm. that's no longer an option. there are likely to be numerous sources, all of whom have an up-close-and-personal view of the situation, who may speak as experts simply because they're there and will write what they see. but as we all know, proximity is not the only (nor necessarily the most important) factor in determining the truth. a person who's unconscious may appear to be a fatality to someone who's not a medical professional...yet, i think the tweeter still is unlikely to rephrase as "there are hundreds of unconscious people here!"
some pr folks are looking down their noses at twitter, saying "it's a fad, it won't last, i don't need to worry about it"... but i wish they'd think again. if we could learn how to use this technology to get a step ahead of crisis situations and other similar events, it could be a real boon to our companies, and the public, both of whom deserve the best info and our best efforts to get it to them quickly.
Saturday, April 18, 2009
twitter for dogs

Willy: Hi, this is willy. I will now attempt in 140 characters or less to have a conversation with my brother to illustrate the value of twitter.
Hoover: This is Hoover. Is it dinnertime yet?
Willy: Hoover has just succinctly shown us one of the key characteristics of twitter, which is the nature of the immediacy of the communication.
Hoover: Gimmedatfood. Gimmedatfood. Gimmedatfood.
Willy: He also clearly points out another interesting quality, which is the ability – nay, the necessity – of communicating in clear language.
Hoover: Huh?
Willy: This is why mom says some old school pr folks don’t like twitter – ‘coz they don’t like talking this way. saying coz instead of “because.”
Hoover: But that just saved you, like, 4 characters!
Willy: Right. And that’s pretty cool when you have to include the spaces in ur tweets. I HATE HAVING TO INCLUDE THE SPACES!
Hoover: That’s why I talk the way I do. Now, gimmedatfood!
Willy: Here’s the deal. Twitter is not some kind of fad. Dogs know this. We’ve been tweeting since the first wolf howled his way to domestication.
Hoover: I thought u just stole that blackberry from mom last week?
Willy: Shhhh, dogbreath. She thinks dad accidentally threw it out!
Hoover: So … I guess now u really have a reason to wrap this post up and GIMMEDATFOOD! I’m starving over here.
Willy: Think about it. When ur dog barks, whines, or just looks at u coz it’s time for eating, playing, or - other stuff - that’s like a tweet.
Hoover: I’m tweeting 2u about dinner but it’s not seeming to work very well?
Willy: Also, Twitter is about communities and connections, which every dog knows r key to the success of both the individual and the group.
Hoover: What I’d like to know is whether this individual and/or group is gonna get some chow anytime soon?
Willy: I’m talking about the future not just of social media, but all marketing. It’s weird, but people would rather trust strangers than experts.
Hoover: Look, I thought this was just about “what r u doing?”
Willy: Dude, that’s like so 6 mos ago. Twitter’s moved way byond that. Think about capabilities 4 crisis mgmt. 4 sales promotion. 4 flash mobs!
Hoover: I thought flash mobs were so 6 months ago?
Willy: Ok, but u get my point (or at least I hope our readers do). Get with the big T b4 its 2 late and your dog beats u2 the future.
Hoover: Whatever. I think marketers should get w twitter coz it’s fast, it’s authentic, and it’s the media of choice of millions. Can’t b ignored.
Willy: Who ru and what have you done with Hoover?
Hoover: Hey look! it’s dog food! Again! How lucky r we?! Let’s eat!!!
Hoover: This is Hoover. Is it dinnertime yet?
Willy: Hoover has just succinctly shown us one of the key characteristics of twitter, which is the nature of the immediacy of the communication.
Hoover: Gimmedatfood. Gimmedatfood. Gimmedatfood.
Willy: He also clearly points out another interesting quality, which is the ability – nay, the necessity – of communicating in clear language.
Hoover: Huh?
Willy: This is why mom says some old school pr folks don’t like twitter – ‘coz they don’t like talking this way. saying coz instead of “because.”
Hoover: But that just saved you, like, 4 characters!
Willy: Right. And that’s pretty cool when you have to include the spaces in ur tweets. I HATE HAVING TO INCLUDE THE SPACES!
Hoover: That’s why I talk the way I do. Now, gimmedatfood!
Willy: Here’s the deal. Twitter is not some kind of fad. Dogs know this. We’ve been tweeting since the first wolf howled his way to domestication.
Hoover: I thought u just stole that blackberry from mom last week?
Willy: Shhhh, dogbreath. She thinks dad accidentally threw it out!
Hoover: So … I guess now u really have a reason to wrap this post up and GIMMEDATFOOD! I’m starving over here.
Willy: Think about it. When ur dog barks, whines, or just looks at u coz it’s time for eating, playing, or - other stuff - that’s like a tweet.
Hoover: I’m tweeting 2u about dinner but it’s not seeming to work very well?
Willy: Also, Twitter is about communities and connections, which every dog knows r key to the success of both the individual and the group.
Hoover: What I’d like to know is whether this individual and/or group is gonna get some chow anytime soon?
Willy: I’m talking about the future not just of social media, but all marketing. It’s weird, but people would rather trust strangers than experts.
Hoover: Look, I thought this was just about “what r u doing?”
Willy: Dude, that’s like so 6 mos ago. Twitter’s moved way byond that. Think about capabilities 4 crisis mgmt. 4 sales promotion. 4 flash mobs!
Hoover: I thought flash mobs were so 6 months ago?
Willy: Ok, but u get my point (or at least I hope our readers do). Get with the big T b4 its 2 late and your dog beats u2 the future.
Hoover: Whatever. I think marketers should get w twitter coz it’s fast, it’s authentic, and it’s the media of choice of millions. Can’t b ignored.
Willy: Who ru and what have you done with Hoover?
Hoover: Hey look! it’s dog food! Again! How lucky r we?! Let’s eat!!!
Wednesday, March 11, 2009
Ameriprise Part 2, and 3, and the illusion of control
occasionally (much less occasionally, lately), i am the hammer and this allows me to recognize the good work of other hammers. so here's what's happened in the ameriprise saga (see my earlier post, below, for the start of the story.)
so the day after i wrote that post, i come home to a phone message from a lovely lady from ameriprise, who says, among other things, "we saw your blog." and i'm like, WHAT? no, that's impossible. i only have 4 followers and 2 of them are dogs. i share a maiden name with the third and my bed with the 4th. but sure enough she had seen the post and knew all about the poor customer service and left her phone number and said she would help me AND the other gal who was apparently in need of some instruction on the company's products and services.
i don't know whether i was more thrilled at the fact that i'm surfacing on amerprise's marketing comms screen as some kinda person of influence, or that they just wanted to fix the brand UX... but in either case, i was in fact thrilled and am using this opportunity to give big snaps to ameriprise for getting it right (well, i'm assuming they will. we've been playing phone tag, which is by no means a situation entirely under their control. so stay tuned for amerprise Part 3, where i will report faithfully on what happened and either send you flying in droves to seek financial nirvana from them, or not.)
speaking of control ... i was having lunch with a couple of folks from 2 fine milwaukee-based communications shops in pr and design, and we were in general agreement that control is not all it's cracked up to be. the design house had just been notified that their work has garnered some awards, and i thought it was a pretty interesting circumstance that those award-winning items are the ones where the client did not get out his/her pointy finger and insist that the type be in a certain color or font, that the images be cropped a certain way, or make any other stupid pronouncement that should without doubt be left up to someone who went to design school (or could have). on the pr side, the same was true -- at the time of the interview, the client had not been convinced the story was a great placement, but gave the agency the benefit of the doubt and in the end it turned out to be a terrific score.
i think really we should stop believing in "control" as a way of getting what we actually want, and instead favor "guidance," which enables agencies and other outside service partners to do more and better work, faster, more easily, and with greater value while still in the end providing us with deliverables that meet our needs. sometimes this means paying for things you end up not wanting -- but i think the true cost of that is significantly less than the benefit of getting something great you didn't know you needed.
Labels:
ameriprise,
control,
design,
pr,
social media
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
