<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" 
      xmlns:thr="http://purl.org/syndication/thread/1.0">
  <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/when_user-generated_content_goes_bad.php" />
  <link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/atom.xml" />
  <id>tag:www.readwriteweb.com,2011:/1/tag:www.readwriteweb.com,2008://1.6404-</id>
  <updated>2011-04-29T11:33:34Z</updated>
  <title>Comments for When User-Generated Content Goes Bad</title>
  
  <generator uri="http://www.sixapart.com/movabletype/">Movable Type 4.35-en</generator>
  <entry>
    <id>tag:www.readwriteweb.com,2008://1.6404</id>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/when_user-generated_content_goes_bad.php" />
    <link rel="service.edit" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-atom.cgi/weblog/blog_id=1/entry_id=6404" title="When User-Generated Content Goes Bad" />
    <published>2008-05-27T12:00:00Z</published>
    <updated>2008-05-26T21:07:53Z</updated>
    <title>When User-Generated Content Goes Bad</title>
    <summary>Viral marketing, user-generated content, online buzz: over the past few years, these terms have been representative of a new way of marketing to consumers that takes advantage of the current popularity of the social web. This new technique involves companies encouraging its customers to create content of their own in order to generate interest in...</summary>
    <author>
      <name>Sarah Perez</name>
      
    </author>
    
    <category term="Trends" />
    
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://www.readwriteweb.com/">
      <![CDATA[<p><img src="http://www.readwriteweb.com/images/anger2.jpg">Viral marketing, user-generated content, online buzz: over the past few years, these terms have been representative of a new way of marketing to consumers that takes advantage of the current popularity of the social web. This new technique involves companies encouraging its customers to create content of their own in order to generate interest in the company's brand. Unfortunately, one of the potential side effects of this strategy is the potential for negative buzz. Despite this fact, a surprisingly low percentage of marketers are monitoring for negative responses. </p>]]>
      <![CDATA[<h2>Users Make UGC, But Few Marketers Monitor It</h2>

<p>A <a href="http://www.jupiterresearch.com">Jupiter Research</a> report on this subject analyzes the risks of negative buzz. The report is entitled &quot;When Good Social Marketing Goes Bad,&quot; but it should be noted that most people use the term &quot;social marketing&quot; to apply to campaigns that mean to bring about social change. The Jupiter report, however, uses the term more casually to mean any marketing campaign that relies on user-generated content of a viral nature. </p>

<p>What they discovered was that although marketers have been quick to embrace this new trend - 35% allow for user-generated content (UGC) on their own web site and 21% have a profile on a social network - they have not been as quick to monitor and combat the negative buzz that some of their consumers will create.</p>

<p>In fact, only 29% of marketers using these techniques are monitoring the online discussions about their products on an ongoing basis and a shocking 17% don't monitor online discussions at all. Also, despite the availability of professional &quot;buzz monitoring&quot; services like Nielsen BuzzMetrics or MotiveQuest, only 8% of marketers used these services in 2007. </p>

<h2>Who's Talking Trash?</h2>

<p><img src="http://www.readwriteweb.com/images/anger.jpg" align="right">The Jupiter report was also able to build a profile of the typical creator of negative user-generated content. This person is usually a heavy user of social networks, predominantly male (60% are male) and into technology (40% are influential in this area and 23% are considered &quot;early adopters&quot;). They are also a potential valuable audience for marketers as 49% tend to act as brand advocates - which means they tend to be vocal influencers who spread the word online. </p>

<h2>How to Fight the Negative Buzz</h2>

<p>Before trying to combat the negative buzz, the first thought needs to be whether or not it's worth the effort. Often, marketers will attempt to offer these negative UGC creators special treatment or invite them to be beta testers in order to keep the feedback private and productive. However, these tactics are not always practical and they don't always work, either. </p>

<p>A marketer must be aware of how far and fast their company will go to fix a legitimate complaint and also how likely the complainer is to adjust their response. Keeping in mind that research shows that only 12% of online adults think UGC like those posted on social networks or message boards is &quot;trustworthy,&quot; going to great lengths to quiet the naysayers is not always worth the effort. </p>

<p>Of course, sometimes it is worth the effort, which is why the most important thing for a marketer to determine is whether or not the negative content is created by someone who just wants to take a cheap shot at the company, or whether it actually offers genuine insight into a product or service's failure. If so, then addressing those persons that created the negative UGC makes sense. Then, it can actually be helpful to engage those people openly in the public forum to show the company is listening to valid complaints and responding. That is a difficult choice to make for a company, as it only takes one loud negative voice to affect an influence on the larger group of the company's customers. However, when done well, this type of response can be a benefit to all.</p>

<h2>Conclusion</h2>

<p>Lately we've seen a lot of companies attempting to combat negative online buzz in new ways - Comcast has been monitoring blogs and social networks for mentions of their company, Digg is now holding <a href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/digg_townhall_censorship_inequality.php">online</a> <a href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/digg_townhall_2_wrapup.php">townhalls</a>, and many other companies are offering customer <a href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/how_to_get_customer_service_via_twitter.php">service via Twitte</a>r. We've also seen the potential volatile situation that can occur when <a href="http://arielwaldman.com/2008/05/22/twitter-refuses-to-uphold-terms-of-service/">one disgruntled customer's voice</a> can attract the attention of the whole crowd, as in the situation with Ariel Waldman's complaint against Twitter. Even <a href="http://arielwaldman.com/2008/05/23/twitter-responds/">she admits on her blog</a> that she never meant &quot;...to bring a mob with pitchforks to Twitter&#8217;s door,&quot; yet that is the power of even one complaint. </p>

<p>An old adage in advertising and marketing is that &quot;a satisfied customer will, on average, tell five people, but a dissatisfied customer will tell everyone they know.&quot; For a company to be successful, especially now when the tools for communication are being intentionally placed in the customers' hands, it is more important than ever to know how to analyze, monitor, and respond to negative online buzz.</p>

<em><small><p>Photo Credits: Angry Latte by <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/csb13/">ChrisB in SEA</a>; 
Attack of The Amancay by <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/amanky/">Amanky</a></p></small></em>]]>
    </content>
  </entry>

  <entry>
    <id>tag:www.readwriteweb.com,2008://1.6404-comment:56522</id>
    <thr:in-reply-to ref="tag:www.readwriteweb.com,2008://1.6404" type="text/html" href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/when_user-generated_content_goes_bad.php"/>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/when_user-generated_content_goes_bad.php#c56522" />
    <title>Comment from Melanie Seasons on 2008-05-30</title>
    <author>
        <name>Melanie Seasons</name>
        <uri>http://fakeplasticnoodles.com</uri>
    </author>
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://fakeplasticnoodles.com">
        <![CDATA[<p>@p-air Here's a direct link to my Comcast/Frank post.  Thanks for mentioning it :)</p>

<p><a href="http://fakeplasticnoodles.com/2008/05/20/frank-eliason-helping-comcast-suck-a-little-bit-less/" rel="nofollow">http://fakeplasticnoodles.com/2008/05/20/frank-eliason-helping-comcast-suck-a-little-bit-less/</a> </p>]]>
    </content>
    <published>2008-05-30T16:13:45Z</published>
  </entry>

  <entry>
    <id>tag:www.readwriteweb.com,2008://1.6404-comment:56253</id>
    <thr:in-reply-to ref="tag:www.readwriteweb.com,2008://1.6404" type="text/html" href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/when_user-generated_content_goes_bad.php"/>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/when_user-generated_content_goes_bad.php#c56253" />
    <title>Comment from Philipp Sauber on 2008-05-28</title>
    <author>
        <name>Philipp Sauber</name>
        <uri>http://www.website-marketing.ch</uri>
    </author>
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://www.website-marketing.ch">
        <![CDATA[<p>Thanks Sarah for this, very interesting.<br />
From experience with our client (inm.ch, a swiss web agency) I can tell, that most of them like the idea but do not follow what's happening after having launched a blog etc. It takes much more time to monitor things than writing them. I can only confirm you statements and therefore I believe UGC is something that's getting out of control, more and more.</p>]]>
    </content>
    <published>2008-05-28T11:24:08Z</published>
  </entry>

  <entry>
    <id>tag:www.readwriteweb.com,2008://1.6404-comment:56226</id>
    <thr:in-reply-to ref="tag:www.readwriteweb.com,2008://1.6404" type="text/html" href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/when_user-generated_content_goes_bad.php"/>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/when_user-generated_content_goes_bad.php#c56226" />
    <title>Comment from Sesli Sohbet on 2008-05-27</title>
    <author>
        <name>Sesli Sohbet</name>
        <uri>http://www.birsesver.com</uri>
    </author>
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://www.birsesver.com">
        <![CDATA[<p>Falafulu great post i agree with the comments..but i think you should be more elaborative on some of the stuff you say.</p>]]>
    </content>
    <published>2008-05-28T06:52:19Z</published>
  </entry>

  <entry>
    <id>tag:www.readwriteweb.com,2008://1.6404-comment:56177</id>
    <thr:in-reply-to ref="tag:www.readwriteweb.com,2008://1.6404" type="text/html" href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/when_user-generated_content_goes_bad.php"/>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/when_user-generated_content_goes_bad.php#c56177" />
    <title>Comment from Falafulu Fisi on 2008-05-27</title>
    <author>
        <name>Falafulu Fisi</name>
        <uri></uri>
    </author>
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="">
        <![CDATA[<p>Sarah said...<br />
<i>Despite this fact, a surprisingly low percentage of marketers are monitoring for negative responses.</i></p>

<p>I haven't used the services of Buzzmetrics, Buzzlogic and the likes, but if these services are expensive, then I will stick to Googling the name I am interested in to monitor. <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sentiment_analysis" rel="nofollow">Sentiment Analysis</a> for monitoring online sentiments are really just search. It is used by the most government security agencies around the world to monitor threats to national security of a particular country. Scientists at Los Alamos have done this sort of development in the last few years or even earlier.</p>

<p>Sentiment analysis is starting to appear in the financial market industry. Positive or Negative comments about a particular stock or group of stocks (sector) do have immediate effects on stock prices. CMU (Carnegie Mellon Uni) had developed a sentiment analysis system they called Warren (after Buffet) where this system scour the financial news sites and market indexes to mine the important commentaries about stocks that are publicly traded in those exchanges. The alert to investors is real-time, because if it is not real-time, then the opportunity for taking counter-measures if it is negative commentary by investors such as portfolio re-allocation might be lost in a few seconds or minutes. On the other hand if it is a good news, then that opportunity might be lost as well if it is not real-time, as those who heard the good news might jump to trade on those opportunities.</p>

<p>So, I can understand the significant of using such services  in realtime as security services or in the financial market because you're dealing with  loosing or gaining money in a matter of seconds or minutes, however, I wouldn't subscribed to Buzzmetrics just to monitor my single company news, because Google can do that job (web search on your company name) just as fine.</p>]]>
    </content>
    <published>2008-05-27T22:15:54Z</published>
  </entry>

  <entry>
    <id>tag:www.readwriteweb.com,2008://1.6404-comment:56171</id>
    <thr:in-reply-to ref="tag:www.readwriteweb.com,2008://1.6404" type="text/html" href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/when_user-generated_content_goes_bad.php"/>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/when_user-generated_content_goes_bad.php#c56171" />
    <title>Comment from James Lewin on 2008-05-27</title>
    <author>
        <name>James Lewin</name>
        <uri>http://www.podcastingnews.com/</uri>
    </author>
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://www.podcastingnews.com/">
        <![CDATA[<p>Joe - it's already happening. </p>

<p>Remember the Kindle rollout, and how it got a lot of favorable blog coverage? Amazon made key tech blogs available on the Kindle as a subscription service, so that the blogs' interests would be aligned with the success of the Kindle. </p>

<p>Sarah - the only tactic for fighting negative buzz that's been proven to work on the Internet is for companies to offer a response that's really worth talking about. </p>

<p>No amount of monitoring or marketing spin can fight the spread of dirt like the Kryptonite lock fiasco or Waldman's Twitter complaint. The only way to handle problems like these is to treat them seriously and come up with an awesomely cool response. </p>

<p>In Waldman's case, the awesomely cool response would have been to address her concerns publicly and work with the Twitter community to determine how to evolve the company to deal with things like harassment.</p>]]>
    </content>
    <published>2008-05-27T20:58:52Z</published>
  </entry>

  <entry>
    <id>tag:www.readwriteweb.com,2008://1.6404-comment:56137</id>
    <thr:in-reply-to ref="tag:www.readwriteweb.com,2008://1.6404" type="text/html" href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/when_user-generated_content_goes_bad.php"/>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/when_user-generated_content_goes_bad.php#c56137" />
    <title>Comment from p-air on 2008-05-27</title>
    <author>
        <name>p-air</name>
        <uri>http://direwolff.wordpress.com</uri>
    </author>
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://direwolff.wordpress.com">
        <![CDATA[<p>If you want a good example of how far a brand can and will go, check out my two posts from my interactions w/Comcast:</p>

<p><a href="http://direwolff.wordpress.com/2008/05/01/frank-eliason-from-comcastcan-you-hear-mehear-mehear-me/" rel="nofollow">http://direwolff.wordpress.com/2008/05/01/frank-eliason-from-comcastcan-you-hear-mehear-mehear-me/</a></p>

<p><a href="http://direwolff.wordpress.com/2008/05/02/comcast-fucken-rocks/" rel="nofollow">http://direwolff.wordpress.com/2008/05/02/comcast-fucken-rocks/</a></p>

<p>Note, that in the comments section of the first post, you'll see a trackback to a post from "Fake Plastic Noodles".  Check out that post as well.  Comcast, and Frank Eliason in particular, have really dialed in on something powerful here.</p>]]>
    </content>
    <published>2008-05-27T15:55:18Z</published>
  </entry>

  <entry>
    <id>tag:www.readwriteweb.com,2008://1.6404-comment:56136</id>
    <thr:in-reply-to ref="tag:www.readwriteweb.com,2008://1.6404" type="text/html" href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/when_user-generated_content_goes_bad.php"/>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/when_user-generated_content_goes_bad.php#c56136" />
    <title>Comment from useradvocate on 2008-05-27</title>
    <author>
        <name>useradvocate</name>
        <uri>http://www.theuseradvocategroup.com</uri>
    </author>
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://www.theuseradvocategroup.com">
        <![CDATA[<p>As a bit of a follow up on Joe's comment about corporate interests in social media, there is also a tricky boundary issue if they employ UGC-like techniques to advertise. It can mix clever UGC-ish ideas with potentially inauthentic expressions and leaves us vulnerable to getting fooled and possibly resentful. </p>

<p>The worst part of this IMO is that it could break down the effectiveness and value of real UGC which has a unique and unprecendented value in human communication (as mentioned by Tom O'Brien above). I think what is needed is the invention of some sort of 'framing' mechanisms to to signal what is real and what is fake UGC. </p>

<p>I'm not holding my breath that commercial enterprises will always respect this but they do run a risk of a backlash if they are outed and seen to be messing things up. E.g. a year ago the makers of the viral wig out bridezilla piece teetered on this edge. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KdbrVhwNCKg)</p>

<p>FYI, I posted about another example (which is actually a cool video but still fake UGC) and explore some ideas about framing UGC here:<br />
<a href="http://www.theuseradvocategroup.com/archives/26" rel="nofollow">http://www.theuseradvocategroup.com/archives/26</a></p>

<p>Micha<br />
TheUserAdvocateGroup</p>

<p><br />
 </p>]]>
    </content>
    <published>2008-05-27T15:29:14Z</published>
  </entry>

  <entry>
    <id>tag:www.readwriteweb.com,2008://1.6404-comment:56134</id>
    <thr:in-reply-to ref="tag:www.readwriteweb.com,2008://1.6404" type="text/html" href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/when_user-generated_content_goes_bad.php"/>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/when_user-generated_content_goes_bad.php#c56134" />
    <title>Comment from Martin Edic on 2008-05-27</title>
    <author>
        <name>Martin Edic</name>
        <uri>http://sm2.techrigy.com</uri>
    </author>
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://sm2.techrigy.com">
        <![CDATA[<p>The cost of entry for social media monitoring has been quite high for services like Buzzmetrics, Buzzlogic, etc. We offer a free version of our monitoring and analysis tool so more people can track their brands, competitors, etc., across the social media eco-system.<br />
Frankly I think the early adopters are going to have a big jumpstart because the whole UGC movement has reached a tipping point that will push it directly into the mainstream. The amazing surge in Twitter use by non-techies recently is a pretty good indicator of this.</p>]]>
    </content>
    <published>2008-05-27T15:11:47Z</published>
  </entry>

  <entry>
    <id>tag:www.readwriteweb.com,2008://1.6404-comment:56132</id>
    <thr:in-reply-to ref="tag:www.readwriteweb.com,2008://1.6404" type="text/html" href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/when_user-generated_content_goes_bad.php"/>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/when_user-generated_content_goes_bad.php#c56132" />
    <title>Comment from The Masked Millionaire on 2008-05-27</title>
    <author>
        <name>The Masked Millionaire</name>
        <uri>http://www.TheMaskedMillionaire.com</uri>
    </author>
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://www.TheMaskedMillionaire.com">
        <![CDATA[<p>The reason companies are not paying too much attention to negative comments is because they really don't take social marketing seriously.  To them it's just some insignificant piece of the pie.</p>

<p>When they get sucker punched by some heavy duty negative buzz then they will wake up.</p>

<p>The Masked Millionaire</p>]]>
    </content>
    <published>2008-05-27T14:52:30Z</published>
  </entry>

  <entry>
    <id>tag:www.readwriteweb.com,2008://1.6404-comment:56129</id>
    <thr:in-reply-to ref="tag:www.readwriteweb.com,2008://1.6404" type="text/html" href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/when_user-generated_content_goes_bad.php"/>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/when_user-generated_content_goes_bad.php#c56129" />
    <title>Comment from Tom O&apos;Brien on 2008-05-27</title>
    <author>
        <name>Tom O&apos;Brien</name>
        <uri>http://humanvoice.wordpress.com/</uri>
    </author>
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://humanvoice.wordpress.com/">
        <![CDATA[<p>Focusing in the negative takes this conversation in the wrong direction.  The great opportunity with social media is for organizations (including corporations) to get into mutually beneficial relationships with people.</p>

<p>Not easy, but a HUGE opportunity.  </p>

<p>@Joe's comment is right on the money, that's why we have WOMMA with a strong code of ethics.  </p>

<p>www.womma.org</p>

<p>TO'B<br />
MotiveQuest LLC<br />
</p>]]>
    </content>
    <published>2008-05-27T13:34:25Z</published>
  </entry>

  <entry>
    <id>tag:www.readwriteweb.com,2008://1.6404-comment:56126</id>
    <thr:in-reply-to ref="tag:www.readwriteweb.com,2008://1.6404" type="text/html" href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/when_user-generated_content_goes_bad.php"/>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/when_user-generated_content_goes_bad.php#c56126" />
    <title>Comment from Joe on 2008-05-27</title>
    <author>
        <name>Joe</name>
        <uri>http://howtowritebusinessplan.blogspot.com/</uri>
    </author>
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://howtowritebusinessplan.blogspot.com/">
        <![CDATA[<p>>>Lately we've seen a lot of companies attempting to combat negative online buzz in new ways ... </p>

<p>I wonder when companies will start buying positive coverage by bloggers with big readership.  We have seen that political candidates are already spreading cash around to bloggers to get positive coverage.  Can corporate American be far behind?  But the blogger universe is so large, I don't think a single corporation can buy it off.  Just too many ants to kill.</p>]]>
    </content>
    <published>2008-05-27T12:38:38Z</published>
  </entry>

</feed>
