You can always create a Facebook page for your company in minutes but that’s not enough – you also need to involve yourself in the various conversations that are happening on your Facebook pages. Here’s an example:
When Nestle posted a message on their Facebook page saying they won’t accept comments from fans who use Nestle logos in their profile picture, it become such a big issue for people. Some even suggested boycotting Nestle products as the logo policy goes against “freedom of speech and expression.”
There were lot of sensible voices in the conversation as well.
Though all big companies (Google, Microsoft, Starbucks, Pizza Hut to name a few) have an active presence on Facebook, it’s mostly one-sided talk and you rarely see them conversing with fans.
Nestle, on the other hand, is more actively involved in the conversations and I think their reps handled the above situation pretty well. A company can only do that when they have dedicated resources – merely publishing news about your products in not enough.
Thank you Gautam John for the tip.
Find this article at: http://labnol.org/?p=13208
Reader Comments
The Nestle rep got trolled obviously…
Written by asd on 03.19.10
Did you actually read the comments that Nestlé made or just note the fact that they responded? The tone of Nestlé comments are aggressive and inflammatory, to the extent that people are questioning whether they are a spoof. How you can consider this to be good practice beggars belief.
Written by Ken on 03.19.10
Oh, and here’s the altered logo set it all off… link
Written by Manish R Hegde on 03.19.10
You think this is an example of doing it right?! Whoever is writing the comments for Nestlé is being too authoritative and borderline snarky. This looks like awfull PR.
Written by Chris Thomas on 03.19.10
I don’t think this is an example of the best way of handling this situation. There are alternatives – for example, understanding why people would use an altered logo in the first place and seeing if there’s a way to solve that problem. Secondly, this article on DI doesn’t explain fully why the author thinks Nestle handled the situation well. Merely being involved in the conversation isn’t enough – in this case it should also have been about winning back customers’ favour.
Comcast’s Twitter profile (@comcastcares) is a great example of managing PR using social networking tools – this seems like a lot of firefighting going on, and after seeing what kind of perils one might face in engaging consumers, am not sure if it’s a great idea. Not without someone competent in place, anyway.
Written by Abhimanyu Ghoshal on 03.19.10
You think Nestle dealt with this well? Adopting a patronising, arrogant and rude attitude over an issue as serious this isn’t good public relations management, it’s a disaster. Brands responses should be honest but somehow I don’t think Nestle will win many plaudits for responding in this manner.
Written by Mark, Digital Media Monkey on 03.19.10
agreed! this controversy will give them a lot of publicity. But God know whether ppl on both sides actually are backed by nestle. IF that is the case, all I can say is they ve gone by it beautifully and creatively.
Written by Trendsetters on 03.19.10
I don’t think anyone looks good in this sort of exchange. And I *do* think Nestle could have done a better job:
The point at which they said “Thanks for the lesson in manners”, which is bitter sarcasm, is where they came off the rails.
There’s a good book I’ve been reading called “The Gentle Art of Verbal Self-Defense” that would help here. There are ways to respond that don’t further incite people.
Just as with email, when you get emotional, it’s time to step away from the computer for a bit. Social media seems to demand quick responses, but quick responses, in the heat of the moment, can be a mistake.
It’s might have been worth waiting a bit to see if any Nestle fans jumped to their defense. Nestle should act as a moderator and give the discussion time to develop before launching into the fray.
On the original point, it’s obvious to me that a modification of the Nestle logo that’s similar enough to be recognized puts someone in a gray area. The lawyers would have to tease that one out.
Written by Brian Carter on 03.19.10
Wow, way to read the excerpt you posted.
How would you feel if I wrote a blog post that links to this article as “a scathing condemnation of Nestle’s boneheaded mishandling of a simple PR mistake”? My summary would be as inaccurate as yours, is it OK?
Written by Owen Pellegrin on 03.19.10
>and I think their reps handled the above situation pretty well.
Really? Were you reading a different page than you posted?
Written by Anurag Mishra on 03.19.10
I think the conversation was badly handled. Just the fact that you respond doesn’t mean its good.
I agree that they can set the rules, but the tone was pretty awful.
Written by HK on 03.19.10
LOL, wow! I think this is an example of horrible PR. Nestle made an issue out of nothing, and then proceeded to bury themselves comment by comment. They did not handle this well. Leaves a sour taste in my mouth… that’s for sure.
There are a lot of things to learn from Nestle. Mostly about how NOT to do FB.
Written by Bob on 03.19.10
It’s totally reasonable for Nestle to ban people using their logo in any form as a profile picture on their page. Someone will be confused by it. Spelling out the rule rather than quietly deleting messages with no explanation is good practice.
Their tone leaves a little to be desired, but they’ve acted quite properly and the other commenters are acting pretty childishly. Whinging about freedom of expression because a company won’t let you insult them using their own logo on their own page is a bit pathetic.
Written by Andrew on 03.19.10
Folks – thanks for the brickbats.
My main point here is that Nestle is very actively participating in the conversation which is something worth sharing because most companies on Facebook just don’t care about that part.
Fans leave comments, thoughts, questions, etc. on Facebook pages but you don’t know if your message is getting through because no one is responding to them.
Written by Amit on 03.19.10
^”Fans leave comments, thoughts, questions, etc. on Facebook pages but you don’t know if your message is getting through because no one is responding to them.”
–But I maintain it would have been more professional to read and ignore most of those inflammatory coments, rather than precipitating a flame war. It gives the impression Nestle’s PR is staffed by adolescents.
Written by charizardpal on 03.19.10
I don’t think they handled the situation well at all… I think their comments are a perfect example of how not to use social media… it does sound like their PR is staffed by adolescents and I think that this, coupled with all the other scandals of recent years is likely to lose them a fair few customers.
Written by Zoe on 03.19.10
And this is why Community Managers are become relevant and well paid positions at social agencies.
Written by Rob on 03.19.10
I think the discussion on the site was meaningless dribble with Nestle exhibiting autocratic corporate speak, which people are sick and tired of.
Completely turned me off Nestle as a company – before seeing it I had no particular opinion of Nestle. I think using a site for that type of dribble discussion and Nestle encouraging it only makes the company look like its being run by a bunch of people with poor social and emotional intelligence. Very infantile responses from Nestle.
It also highlights that using social networking can be a complete waste of time, resources and money if implemented poorly, can backfire very quickly and ‘attract’ people (staff and customers) who contribute little to/even detract from, enhancing the brand or its sales.
Written by steve on 03.19.10
This is a disaster for Nestle and they’re not handling it well at all. The very nature of the message that started this debacle illustrates clearly that they do not understand the nature of social environments. “Do not post altered versions of our logos as your profile pic – they will be deleted” is completely in conflict with the nature of sharing and community. They’ve come off as heavy handed and corporate, not affable and approachable.
Written by Brian on 03.19.10
> The author of this post is a professional blogger.
…you wrote this yourself, didn’t you? ;) Mind if any of us writes an intro for you?
Written by Arif on 03.19.10
The Nestle response here is far from good. It’s damaging to the company. The tone of their response should be along the lines of “We appreciate our customers and fans but this is a step we have to take to protect our brand”, instead this seems like petty back and forth.
Written by keithshep on 03.19.10
Nestle should have been better off being passive from the conversation, instead of gunning down fans who beliefs and views were critical to their so called ‘rules’.. total PR disaster!
Written by Bahrur on 03.19.10
Dude, why do you even blog!?
You really think this is a good thing? When I was reading the comments I thought you gave that as something that should NOT be done.
I agree that it’s good that people are participating but that is a very bad example of it. People may be participating but the person in charge of the page is very unprofessional and a bad example of a PR person.
As young as I am, 19, I know this: Praise in public and correct in private. The best thing Nestle could do is delete the comments and send a message to the person asking him not to do it again.
There’s no doubt that caused them some fuss and brought nestle to people’s attention but look at the final result: People are boycotting its products.
I think this is badly handled, a bad example, a bad attitude, and a bad post. A better example would be Facebook’s own page. link
Written by Laith Juwaidah on 03.19.10
Nestle certainly didn’t handle it well; and your saying that they did – does not look good on you too. It is obvious that this is a disaster for them. Your endorsement of their handling is damaging for you too. Amit listen to your readers – it is time for a retraction.
Written by Ajay on 03.19.10
Amit, if you wrote this one, you need a cup of Not Nestle coffee.. The rep of nestle did more damage than the other “one sided” monologous companies.
Written by nagesh pai on 03.20.10
The Nestle haters were so obnoxious. I’m glad the Nestle rep fought back.
Written by ardyanovich on 03.20.10
PS: I unsubscribed from DI after this post.
Written by Laith Juwaidah on 03.20.10
Didn’t find the issue convincing to be classfied as some social media day saver stuff. But anyways noticed that Nestle’s FB page haven’t adopted a username yet with 91,806 fans already. :/
Written by rndm on 03.20.10
It isn’t important to always be right or to always show you are in control. It is kind of sad that this Nestle rep has such low self esteem, they need to prove to others who is in charge.
Written by PamInCa on 03.20.10
Nestle has the right to ask fans to please not alter the logo. They should have asked in a humorous, non-corprateish way that would endear people to them rather than in an aggressive, defensive way. The tone of the responses that Nestle posted was inappropriate for social media and any type of corporate communications. Nestle did not realize that the real damage comes not only from the fan responses on Facebook itself, but from the fact that this story will make its way around all social media outlets in a matter of minutes, hours and days and will take on a life of its own.
Written by Barbara V on 03.20.10
Dude sincere advice, stick to tech and don’t give companies advice on PR. Nestle’s facebook presence is an unmitigated disaster.
Written by Anuj Gupta on 03.20.10
Wow, I’m late to the party here it seems but this blog post is wrong in multiple aspects. Amit, not too many companies (let alone huge FMCG corporations) that maintain Facebook pages have “one-sided talk”. There is a reason why their PR and Social Media reps get paid so well.Secondly, you DON’T set the rules anymore when you venture into social media because by choosing to use the medium you accept that you’re your consumer’s equal and not some big shot corporation. Lastly, you NEVER get snarky with a consumer (existing or potential), online or offline.
As to your main point- “My main point here is that Nestle is very actively participating in the conversation which is something worth sharing because most companies on Facebook just don’t care about that part.” No, Social Media is NOT only about participation, it’s how you participate that matters most. Coming across as a bully is the surest way of ensuring your company’s Social Media rep goes down the drain. Also, there are plenty (please do a Facebook search)of companies that participate and participate effectively on social media sites such as Facebook. Might I suggest better research before you make such broad sweeping statements?
Written by LSM on 03.21.10