Hanging by a thread
In issues management there is always a new experience to be had, and based on a recent episode online media will bring challenges aplenty for those of us involved in issues and reputation management.
This new media is like talkback on steroids where those with a point of view or complaint can rage to their heart’s content, largely under the cover of anonymity.
Trade Me’s community message board is usually a forum where members, mainly active traders and, from what I have seen, women share advice and experiences. On the message board there are segments of interest, such as computing, environment, parenting and farming. Within this structure members are free to start up discussion topics, or threads.
A current example of a new thread in the “opinion” segment of the message board is: Does John Key have a wife and children….??? Yesterday this thread attracted 52 comments ranging from criticism of using his daughter in campaign material to comments about his wife. Another thread on the “parenting” segment is titled: Bleeding from the bladder. Within three hours last evening there were 43 postings, many from the same people.
All slightly odd – but probably harmless, you might think.
My experience was with a product issue – product satisfaction not safety – and a few individuals went beyond mere commentary to actual threats.
Unlike talkback, Trade Me’s message board has no anchor point or moderator, such as the radio host, through whom a balancing point of view might be represented.
So how to you manage such issues?
From my recent experience, the ABC of managing these situations goes like this:
-
Maintain a ‘clean’ membership of Trade Me – one that has never traded before – and hold it dormant.
-
Seek advice from the Trade Me’s administrators, and discipline yourself to follow it.
-
Respond only to the macro scene, not individual jibes and baiting.
-
Prepare from the outset for the issue to potentially graduate from the dark world of “online’ to traditional media.
Some general observations:
-
The Trade Me community has its own leaders and followers, and there are members who also communicate and plan with each other offline.
-
If you have a real issue act sooner rather than later – decisively and clearly.
-
The medium is prone to the ill-informed leading the uninformed.
-
The moderate voices in the “community’ are often bullied into submission.
-
The more extreme postings/commentary seem to be made late at night.
How do you view online media, and is this a medium that you currently monitor?
Tags: issues management, new media, online, Trade Me
October 15th, 2008 at 9:53 am
I think this is a good approach – particularly with a ‘general interest’ discussion forum like TradeMe.
As you point out, there are leaders in online communities. The ideal is to be able to engage with them (ideally one-to-one, possibly offline) and then have them endorse (or maybe just refer or link to) your viewpoint and key messages. This effectively becomes an ‘influencer relations’ approach.
In practice, this is often easier in targeted online communities, where a company is more likely to have an actual relationship with industry participants who may also be commenting online. Targeted communities also more likely to be moderated – and the moderator is often viewed as a leader due to their expertise not just authority. Eg, in the technology space the moderator of Geekzone.co.nz (the largest tech community in NZ) has often passed on comments from corporates and PR. He is known to be approachable and I he think sees this as providing a service to his readers.
October 16th, 2008 at 11:58 am
I currently monitor the forums on gaynz.com. Such an example of the macro response is as follows – After a recently released report on the issue of gay rights and blood donation the NZ Aids Foundation backed the finding that the policy of not allowing men who sleep with men to donate blood was not discriminatory. A number of the more extreme forum members on the gaynz forums were outraged that the NZ Aids Foundation would take this position. After several days of constant negative posts on this – a major channel for this community, the NZ Aids Foundation finally posted a response. The response was an explanation of why the organisation had backed the report and a recognition of some of the community members concerns over the issue, it was not a response to any one posting (therefore a macro response). Negative posts did continue to ensue after the response and the forum did generate enough coverage that eventually led to a somewhat sensationalist article appearing in a local community paper. I still believe the NZAF acted correctly however as at least for some of the more level headed members of the community they had clarified their position.
I think a forum is much like a political rally. Everyone is shouting and there will always be the odd nutter or two however the most productive thing to do as the politician attending (or organisation posting on the forum) is address real concerns of the public while staying on message. The objective is to try and channel the concerns of the public into positive or at least objective debate.
Click here for a recent political rally example: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w4Xi8JnfAHI
In regard to the more mainstream online media in New Zealand such as Stuff.co.nz, NZ Herald online and even the TVNZ election Youtube site, like talkback I find them slightly biased towards the right in their blog postings, user poll results and video comments. Is this a reflection of the demographic that uses online media in New Zealand the most or is that there is just no decent mainstream alternative in New Zealand with a more balanced audience and perspective?