The Buffalo Blog

Nestlé learn how NOT to use social media

Towards the end of last week Nestlé started to feel the full brunt of the BBC’s Panorama special ‘Dying for a biscuit’. The documentary focused on the devastating effects both the usage and lack of regulation surrounding palm oil has on deforestation and consequently the fate of hundreds of species local to the Indonesian forests being destroyed – especially the Orangutans.

The documentary sparked debate surrounding the food giant after it showed a trolley filled with Nestlé goods all containing palm oil. Shocked viewers couldn’t wait to voice their opinions on the matter, posting comments, joining groups and signing petitions whilst the programme was still being aired.

Consequently Nestlé is now facing a PR battle with charity Greenpeace over claims that it is continuing to source palm oil from Sinar Mas, the Indonesian company accused of illegal deforestation and peatland clearance.

Greenpeace ignited reports after protesting outside the company’s headquarters last week dressed as orangutans. Following this the charity decided to bring in the tried and tested shock tactics,  posting an online video featuring an office worker accidently biting into an orangutan finger instead of a Kit Kat.

The backlash wasn’t to end there however, the firm has continued to be bombarded every minute with angry comments from both consumers and protestors alike. Nestlé’s Facebook and Twitter pages have truly taken a lashing.

Surely this must stand to be the most in your face example of when social media needs to be monitored and managed? With over 90, 967 Facebook fans, Nestlé’s reaction has been criticised as being a ‘major social media fail' with only inexperienced moderators fanning the flames.

Whilst consumers threaten to boycott the brand and others have altered their Facebook profile pictures to a bloodied Nestlé logo, the company has however responded by saying:

“We welcome your comments, but please don't post using an altered version of any of our logos as your profile pic - they will be deleted.” - Comments which have further fuelled the fire, rather than extinguish it.                                                 

One furious user wrote: "Nestlé is the work of the devil. Evil evil corporation, and your bullish reactions and arrogant comments have won you no favours at all.”

Instead of parachuting in a crisis management team, the Nestlé moderator has just whimpered: “As you can see we're learning as we go. Thanks for the comments.”

Surely if Nestle and all the other organisations continue to explore and interact within the social media realm, then they should have some sort of  crisis plan in place if it should all go wrong -  NOT risk the brand’s reputation by simply relying on non experienced employees to ‘learn as they go’.

In my opinion Nestlé forgot the PR basics when dealing with a crisis, off or online the principles are the same.

Firstly – in any crisis it is important to show you are addressing the situation, monitoring the online sphere requires full time attention and so in this case, Nestlé would have done well in employing the help of social media PR professionals.

Secondly – Nestlé’s Facebook page was initially set up as somewhere fans could rave about their products, however now the tables have turned it’s been totally overtaken by angry protestors. Choosing another forum to communicate with customers (with advanced privacy and moderation settings) would definitely have been one way to avoid such damage.

Thirdly - as PR disasters.com nicely points out, Nestlé’s Facebook tone of voice is all wrong; a bit sarcastic and scolding at times - which doesn’t foster positive Web2.0 PR.

And lastly it is important to remember social media works both ways, now “learning” from their mistakes in a very public and damaging way, now at least Nestlé should now maybe go about employing someone who has some experience in online crisis management, which could have made the situation avoidably in the first place.

Social media - giving Haitians a voice

 

 

With traditional communication channels disrupted by the disaster in Haiti, once again social media’s importance was emphasised.

Minutes after the catastrophic earthquake hit Haiti, the power of the internet and social media started to shine through. Where more typical communication channels were affected by the quake, Haitians and aid workers alike turned to the likes of Twitter and Facebook to spread the word through the horrific scenes captured on mobile phones.

Among its multiple uses, social media in this case played a vital role in letting the world know the disastrous extent of the tragedy and that help was needed quickly in order to have the most positive effect.

Both citizens and aid workers alike uploaded TwitPics, tweeted the news and tried to find the whereabouts of loved ones on Facebook. The world turned to the platform when all other forms of communication were not an option. Even the landlines near the epicentre were wiped out by the quake, hampering rescue efforts.

Next came an outpouring of well wishes and support for the Haitian people as thousands of Facebook and Twitter updates appeared every minute. Among these updates were the appeals of the American Red Cross.

Even if you were to type "Haiti" into Twitter, Youtube or Facebook now, a few days on,  you will soon encounter @redcross’s message of appeal sent at 05:38 GMT on January 13, less than 48 hours after the tragedy.

In such a short space of time the American Red Cross was able to both set up an appeal and receive more than $35m in donations through the site.

Praise has already been awarded by the American Red Cross to the social media platform for “playing an extremely significant part” in spreading the word.

So this got me wondering, what makes Twitter, Facebook and YouTube so accommodating when communicating disasters quickly?

Well, when looking at Twitter you need to address the key advantages of the site. The main advantage is the initial barrier breakdown through the ability to communicate with anyone and everyone from celebrities to your next door neighbour.

For example famous Haitian musician, Wyclef Jean, managed to raise $1m for earthquake victims, after appealing for help from his 1.3 million followers through Twitter. People like Michelle Obama were also contacted by aid charities, first through tweeting then retweeting appeals, further spreading the message.

Meanwhile on Youtube, there was an influx in bloggers posting their own appeals and calling for donations. On Facebook, awareness groups, such as Earthquake Haiti gained over hundreds of thousands of members, linking them directly to charity sites.

These examples show how social media is set on continuing to play an important role in the communication of disasters, keeping the news at the forefront of the public agenda whilst it starts to slip off of the front pages of the Tabloids and fade out of the media’s spotlight.

In keeping with the trend, please pass the word on and visit British Red Cross

twitter – a license to print money?

In the wake of what people are calling the ‘mainstreaming’ (is that a word? better ‘mainstreamisation’) of twitter – Stephen Fry’s appearance on @wossy’s popular talk show – it draws ever closer to the moment that all social media start-ups inevitably; the ‘how the *!@£ do we make money out of it’ stage.

 

In an ideal social media world, of course, this moment would never occur and we could continue having fun in our ‘web 2.0topia’. But this is the real world and when something becomes a big success, founders inevitably want something for their hard work and rightly so. And so, the twitter founders crawl away from their computers after however many million tweets, and start looking for their holy grail – how to make millions from 140 word messages…

 

I say this stage is approaching, but the truth is that the wheels are already in motion with last week/month’s hiring of the first commercial twitter employee Kevin Thau. Interestingly though, it seems the founders aren’t in it for the quick buck after turning down a reported $500m purchase approach from Facebook late last year. Perhaps the contract was too restrictive in terms of future profits for them to accept, or perhaps they’re still loathe to see their grassroots social media site become another lumbering web 2.0 behemoth and all the restrictions that come with it – we can only guess. Either way, they’re sure to be planning something and it’s not likely to be long ‘til users find out what this is.

 

As is usual in these cases, if twitter does bow to a takeover eventually or continues to seek market-based funding for organic growth, it all comes down to how the thing is going to make money. How they do this is of course, the million/billion dollar question.

 

But there are a few things that need to be worked out beforehand to make sure any roll-out goes smoothly and avoid the frosty reception received by Facebook’s Beacon system:

·         The technology – Drew Benvie of Hotwire commented on the latest failure of twitter to cope with big peaks in demand. Not counting on the weight of British support on twitter, they were not awake to the inevitable usage peak that would come after Stephen Fry’s appearance on Jonathan Ross’s chat show. The old PR faux pas occurred where thousands wanted to check out the website and due to sheer numbers, nobody could. Quality and continuity of service need to be foolproof before any thoughts of cash are had

·         Understanding uses – twitter is a boon to marketing types and journalists but there is still a massive portion of web-savvy consumers that don’t use it. Twitter is amazing for information sharing and that’s why we all love it, but some people still simply can’t see the point. Many now-advocates of twitter (including me) dismissed it on the first try and many others will inevitably join, but some will never get involved. Stephen Waddington, MD of Rainier PR looked at the tech adoption lifecycle in his blog. Twitter and marketers using twitter need to understand this if they are to do anything profitable with the site.

·         Understanding users – people are often put-off when new media sites are ‘tainted’ with the corporate dollar. Twitter needs to tread carefully, understanding the who, how and why of using the site before anything is even beta tested on the site

·         Innovation – obviously advertising money has to come into the bargain at some point, but an innovative service demands innovation in monetisation. So many sites just slap on a load of banner or flash ‘slide over’ ads in a quick stack ‘em up and pile ‘em high selling mentality. If twitter is to carry advertising, it needs to develop something non-intrusive and useful whilst addressing any data privacy concerns that arise. Although, the fact that everything uploaded to the site is public anyway may negate certain problems from the outset.

There’s definitely a fair way to go before twitter makes any significant cash but they’re bound to start trying soon enough. For the when and how we’ll just have to wait and see…

BEBO goes to Gliese 581c to break intergalactic PR boundaries

BEBO is breaking into new markets like never before. Rather than limit itself to Europe or even the Earth, it plans to build the social networking phenomenon Gliese 581c.

In a classic PR stunt, the networking site has announced plans to send 500 messages, to the nearest planet able to support which happens to be Gliese 581c, a mere 20.5 light years away.

Whether the market conditions are right for this hubris-laden move is yet to be ascertained. However, it is hoped that the iPhone will be well-established on the planet, vastly enhancing the chances of starting one or two BEBO communities, when the messages finally get there in 2029.

To sum up a rather ridiculous post I can only say it’s nice to see the old PR tactics are still going strong in this time of change – well done to the BEBO comms team.

Mediaset sues Google

Interesting to see another big company dive into a costly YouTube copyright lawsuit without fully assessing the opportunities that may be at hand. Mediaset, an Italian media group is suing Google for 500m Euros for alleged "illegal commercial use" of copyrighted clips on YouTube.

While Buffalo in no way condones dodgy copyright dealings and thinks it’s wrong for others to benefit from other people’s hard work, Mediaset could really benefit from taking a more ‘laissez faire’ approach. In a similar vein to my previous post 'A word on music piracy' there are obvious unexplored avenues that could turn situation into a great opportunity.

As with most forms of Social and Web 2.0 media it can often be great marketing to simply let go of the message. Doing so in YouTube is likely to be the best policy. This doesn’t mean just giving in, rather attempting to turn a bad situation into something really profitable.

There are also numerous benefits to be had by doing this. For example: why doesn’t the company strike a deal with Google for instant click-through purchases where its clips are featured?

It’s also true that many YouTube users check out the latest trailers, view an episode of a programme or even listen to music before moving onto an actual legal and profitable purchase. In this sense the site becomes a showcase and ‘try before you buy’ mechanism, complementing rather than negatively affecting the company’s sales.

While the likely recompense for Mediaset, should they win the lawsuit, is large, the rewards could be much greater if they tried a more canny approach…

Cuil to cull Google?

News reports today on the launch of Cuil, a new search engine set up by a band of Google defectors, in a bid to challenge the domination of their former employer. Apparently Cuil boasts a page index three times the size of Google, but this unsurprisingly is denied by its big brother.

The first thing is that it’s great to see some kind of new life is still left in the search industry, where AltaVista, Ask, MSN, and Yahoo, while representing fair-sized companies, have still failed to capture a decent portion of the market. There has also been little sign of a challenge to the incumbent from these existing players – the proposed Microsoft-Yahoo deal, that could give it the scale and cash to mount a real challenge, continues to blow hot and cold.

However, while search mutineers obviously have the inside track on the invincible Google, it remains to be seen if they’ll ever be able to truly lock horns with such an established player. Technology and algorithms they may have, but Google grew up in a time where it was obviously far ahead of its rivals. At the time those customers demanding quality and relevant search results were there for the taking and Google took the opportunity.

Cuil is attempting to steal a march in what is a veritable monopoly in the search space. ‘Googling’ is well engrained in the mentality of today’s internet user and will be a hard habit to break – anybody fancy ‘Cuiling it’? So to have any chance of success Cuil needs to offer something substantially different and substantially better than Google – a mammoth task.

Whether a group of ex-Googlites have the scale, investment or the technical knowledge to do this still remains to be seen. For all we know they could be sitting on something that could blow the industry wide open, of they could just be another ‘me-too’.

What I will say, is that for an industry desperately needing some healthy competition, I wish Cuil all the luck in the world.

A word on music piracy

News in the Guardian today reports on a government-backed drive to crush internet music piracy by targeting severe offenders parents.

The move, backed by BT, Virgin Media, Orange, Tiscali and BSkyB, will see stern ‘disist or face the consequences’ type letters dropping unhappily on to people’s doorsteps in hope of simply scaring kids out of the illegal downloading game.

Of course illegal music sharing is a bad thing and does lose the industry large amounts of money each year. However, I can’t help thinking that this is approaching the problem in the wrong way.

Yes the problem is rife amongst young people but generally this kind of thing is frowned upon in adult society. The result is that that kids usually graduate from the world of Bittorent and other P2P file sharing into the paying and legal world of marketplace of iTunes.

Microsoft has the right idea in this area – it actually uses the proliferation of illegal Microsoft software to inform its future strategy and seek out new markets. Growing use of pirated software in a developing country can then be developed into a paying and profitable customer base.

Adopting a policy of fear to get kids out of illegal music, rather than turning the situation into an advantage, runs the future risk of losing possibly long-term and lucrative customers.

TiVo lost in the Amazon jungle?

An interesting Slashdot post today notes a new deal struck between Amazon US and TiVo (the popular US advert-zapping set top pox much maligned by the advertising community). Rather than partnering to deliver video content from Amazon or something similarly innovative, it seems that TiVo has sold its soul doing a full circle and become a product pushing device in its own right.

The deal it appears is to serve up instantly buyable merchandise around certain top US shows so that viewers can watch and buy right away. Of course this is better than simple scattergun advertising but will TiVo users see it this way? After all, they bought the box to escape from adverts only to find themselves being served adverts through the very same device.

I have heard chatter about some new and more exciting developments in the IPTV advertising space. One such example is being able to provide targeted ads alongside web delivered content relating to their content and previous purchasing tastes. Such a service could technically serve different ads to different people even thought they were using the same IPTV service and watching exactly the same show.

This is a great idea and is likely to garner greater response and be much less intrusive than traditional methods. However, the way this kind of IPTV ad is delivered and the data used to target consumers obviously will have to be implemented smartly to avoid flak from internet privacy advocates.

Either way, surely this is where the market should be looking? Somewhere infinitely more effective than an advertising killer starting to provide adverts..

A giant leap for BT; a medium-sized step for the internet

A giant leap for BT; a medium-sized step for the internet

Just weeks after Ofcom’s announcement that it plans to back up companies that need to make ‘risky investments’ in next-generation broadband networks, BT has confirmed itself as the first on the scene. The announcement? That it plans to invest £1.5bn in the rollout of fibre optic networks to 10 million homes by 2012.

While the timeframes of the move means that the man on the street may not see the benefits of the move for some time, the announcement will be celebrated widely and rightly so.

The UK is currently lagging behind many other countries on network infrastructure but has a burgeoning music download and IPTV industry. These companies increasingly use more and more of the UK’s limited available bandwidth. As a result, iPlayer (mentioned in the BT announcement release), Joost, 4OD, Kangaroo (if it makes it through competition investigations) are all on course for a collision in the fight for bandwidth.

Ofcom’s support and BT’s move couldn’t have come at a more fortuitous time. While fairly late in the day where Europe is concerned, this move will do much to kickstart further investment in infrastructure from those telcos and ISPs that don’t want to be left behind in the fibre optic stakes.

The move is also the first step in shifting the super size brick that looms ominously on the horizon of IPTV providers, paving the way for next generation web services. Streaming personalised music stations comprehensive on-demand video, increased take-up of online ‘games’ such as Second Life and Google lively and many other services that require a lot of bandwidth should all result.

While we could be talking years for some of these developments it should be an exciting time for the internet as a whole.

All networked out? Social network dissonance might not be long coming

As if to confirm Gartner’s assertions about the growth of business social networking/CRM applications, covered in a recent post, BT has snapped up Ufindus, a popular social directory, for a mere snip at £20m.

While the valuation of these types of businesses is always shaky, BT’s move marks another interesting development in the drive to truly engage customers in a purchasing process.

However, while the intentions are good and buisness case for the purchase sound, it will be interesting to see what kind of interface will be used by BT and the other companies that start to dabble in social network-type interfaces.

The worry is that with so many different sites doing this kind of thing, trying to get information out of customers via sign-up mechanisms could become increasingly difficult. Indeed, the company and service-specific social network could become the online equivalent of the much maligned store loyalty card. Recent research from Pigsback.com, an online cashback company, found that people are increasingly disengaged with cards due to the sheer number that they have to manage and the poor rewards that are usually offered.

Companies investing in social networks are usually going to be looking for ad revenue. However, in the drive to create increasingly specific user profiles and thus more attractive databases for advertisers, they may be in danger of putting people off. Consumers only have a limited amount of time, patience and enthusiasm to give over personal data. As a result companies will need to become increasingly savvy about exactly what they need out of customers and manage the implementation of their social networks very carefully.