Social Media Catastrophes

Tuesday, April 27, 2010

Tuesday, April 27, 2010

Problem:
Two employees from an individually owned Dominos store shot a few videos showing them in the restaurants kitchen putting cheese up their nose, nasal mucus on the sandwiches and other disgusting and unsanitary acts. The video was then uploaded onto YouTube and reached more than a million views, inciting a social media uproar, particularly on Twitter. A few days after the video surfaced, references to the incident were in ve out of the twelve results on Googles rst page when searching Dominos.

Video has been removed from YouTube

Tuesday, April 27, 2010

Response:
Dominos was on top of the situation within 48 hours and the video was taken down by YouTube, but not before it had reached a million views. Although the two employees promised that the food was never actually delivered (and the the video was made as a prank), they were red and eventually faced felony charges. The franchisee brought in the local health department which advised them to discard all the open containers of food. Dominos created a Twitter account (@dpzinfo) to address comments and its CEO released a video on YouTube. The company also released an o cial statement on their website admonishing their employees and apologizing to consumers.

Tuesday, April 27, 2010

Fallout:

Tagged by users and the media as booger-gate, the repercussions of this social media disaster caused many consumers to boycott the pizza chain. Although the company countered the attack by stating that the health violations portrayed in the video were an isolated incident, consumers were and are still wary of the brand. Dominos has since launched a sweeping rebranding campaign in an attempt to counter the tarnished image of the company caused by the video.

http://www.petitiononline.com/TGIFscam/petition.html

Tuesday, April 27, 2010

Tuesday, April 27, 2010

Mars, the maker of Skittles candy, scrapped its home page on the Web and put in its place a collage of content from social networking sites. The hodgepodge included a live Twitter feed, chatter and video from Flickr and YouTube. All the social media feeds were fairly harmless--except the tweets from Twitter. Any tweets hashtagged with #skittles were immediately populated onto their site- leaving the page vulnerable for attack from users. By day two, some of the comments were scalding. Among the most alarming: "F!*K Skittles." It certainly wasn't the reaction Mars expected.

Problem:

http://www.forbes.com/2009/03/11/twitter-friendfeed-skittles-leadership-cmo-network-skittles.html

Tuesday, April 27, 2010

Response:
Skittles had a great idea and was on the right track with letting its users interact and populate the space, however, there was an absolute lack of boundaries. Although the company put an age restriction on their site (13 years old+), Skittles kept the Twitter feed up for a while before they completely revamped their strategy and their site, moving their social elements to the corner of the page.

Where the Social feeds live on the new Skittles website

Tuesday, April 27, 2010

For days, users would be greeted with o ensive and vulgar Tweets on the Skittles website. The complete lack of moderation resulted with the brand getting abused and bashed openly on their own website, with words such as anal cunt etc. getting fed directly onto their corporate sponsored site. Considering that children are also part of the Skittles demographic, the strategy was also polarizing and outraged many parents who protested, not allowing their children to visit the site.

Fallout:

http://www.petitiononline.com/TGIFscam/petition.html

Tuesday, April 27, 2010

10

Tuesday, April 27, 2010

Problem:
Greenpeace accuses Nestle of contributing to the extinction of the orangutan by partnering with palm-oil suppliers in Indonesia who were causing deforestation. The organization staged protests and created a microsite where they posted provocative videos against the brand, which showed a worker opening a KitKat look-a-like wrapper and biting into an orangutan nger. Facebook users posted negative comments on Nestles brand page, some even changing their prole picture to an altered Nestle Killer logo, and ooded Twitter with negative tweets. Some users rallied together and encouraged others to boycott all Nestle products.

11

Tuesday, April 27, 2010

Response:
Nestle lobbied to have the YouTube video removed and also posted a statement on their website the day the video went live, announcing the termination of the accused supplier. In response to the onslaught of negative posts on their Facebook page, moderators posted: To repeat: we welcome your comments, but please dont post using an altered version of any of our logos as your prole pic-- they will be deleted. This defensive response only enraged users further, creating a second tailspin on an already devastating PR nightmare. Eventually the page apologized to fans for its rude responses and stopped deleting comments on the wall.

12

Tuesday, April 27, 2010

Fallout:
Nestles brand was not only attacked by Greenpeace supporters and environmentalists, but also social media users for their mishandling of the entire situation. Many users accused Nestle of censoring Facebook dialogue- a cardinal sin in the social media sphere. Negative sentiment about the companys association with deforestation even a ected their international market, particularly when Twitter users picked up the story about Nestles Facebook bullying strategy. In addition, Indonesian palm-oil suppliers were threatening to also boycott the company for cutting ties with the market.

13

Tuesday, April 27, 2010

14

Tuesday, April 27, 2010

Problem:

TGI Friday's launched a huge Facebook o er using a ctitious fan named Woody. If self proclaimed number one fan Woody could get 500,000 Facebook fans by 30th September 2009, then the rst 500,000 would be entitled to a free Jack Daniels Burger or Jack Daniels Chicken Sandwich. TGI Fridays was not prepared for the campaign response and after a soft launch on Sept. 2 and a subsequent e-mail campaign, Woody picked up 80,000 friends, even before TV and digital banners were launched Sept. 7. By Sunday, Sept. 13, Woody hit the proposed 500,000 Facebook fan mark...

Just 11 days after the campaign commenced.

15

Tuesday, April 27, 2010

Response:
Facing a mutiny of ravenous consumers, TGIF did little more than extended the o er to a million fans in order to silence the voices of the angry new fans.
FAQ for frustrated fans Woodys responses

16

Tuesday, April 27, 2010

Fallout:
TGI Fridays was unprepared for the extreme response. They couldnt keep up with the coupon demand created by the overwhelming acquisition of new fans and, in turn, disappointed their captive audience...

What sounded like a great idea in theory turned into a forum for angry fans to vent their frustrations with no moderation.

http://www.petitiononline.com/TGIFscam/petition.html

17

Tuesday, April 27, 2010

Fallout:
Once the promotion was over, TGI Fridays pulled down the Woody page and abandoned all the fans their promotion had recruited. TGI Fridays launched a campaign with a ctional fan, violating social media tenants of authenticity and transparency and ultimately did nothing more than bribe fans to join their page. TGI Fridays seemed to have no long term objective of how to engage these fans once they were acquired.

Woodys Facebook Fan Growth

1,000,000 800,000 600,000 400,000 200,000 0 July 2009
Woody (T.G.I.F.)

August 2009

September 2009

October 2009

November 2009 December 2009

January 2010

T.G.I.F used incentives to gain their Woody fans.

18

Tuesday, April 27, 2010

19

Tuesday, April 27, 2010

Problem:
A groundswell of outrage, concern and confusion sprang up in response to what authors and others believed was a decision by Amazon to remove "adult" titles from its sales rankings in April, 2009. Hundreds of gay-and lesbian-themed books suddenly disappeared from Amazon.coms rankings which caused an uproar among authors and activists who alleged it was a stealthy extension of the companys policy concerning adult content.

http://www.publishersweekly.com/article/405273-Amazon_Says_Glitch_to_Blame_for_New_Adult_Policy.php http://justanothermobilemonday.com/Wordpress/2009/04/13/amazon-is-selling-discrimination/

20
http://www.wired.com/epicenter/2009/04/amazon-sales-ra/ Tuesday, April 27, 2010

Response:
The internet bookseller claimed it was the result of a technical "glitch and did not o er any other statements or interactions.

Fallout:
Not addressing such a volatile issue left too much room for the problem to escalate in the social space. Authors were outraged and readers vowed to never use the web-service again, joining together in their anger.

21

Tuesday, April 27, 2010

22

Tuesday, April 27, 2010

Problem:
In a promotion nanced by KFC, Oprah Winfrey o ered a free chicken dinner coupon on her website...

The response was overwhelming.

Consumer response created an online tra c jam as many rushed to download the coupon before 9:59 p.m. central time May 6. As KFCs around the country were inundated with customers, bloggers and tweeters complained about long lines and stores refusing the coupons.

23

Tuesday, April 27, 2010

Response:
KFC posted an apology tweet, including dozens of replies to Twitter complaints.

KFC also issued 6.5 million rain checks that included a free cup of Pepsi.

Fallout:
El Pollo Loco took advantage of KFC's troubles by o ering to honor the Oprah 2 Piece Meal coupon on Mother's Day, a day excluded in the coupon's May 5 - May 19 window. El Pollo Loco will give one free two-piece ame-grilled chicken meal per customer with the coupon on May 10. Not only did KFC infuriate coupon holders, but they were one-upped by a competitor.

http://www.qsrweb.com/article.php?id=14360

24

Tuesday, April 27, 2010