It amazes to me how many time this article has been written. “How To Handle Online Criticism” or “What To Do When You’re the Bad Guy” or “Managing Your Brand’s Reputation in 2.0″ or any of the other umpteen iterations of the same situation: how to say your sorry online.

Sorry

HubSpot’s blog laid out “4 Tips for Managing Online Criticism” late last week and offered some sound, practical advice on how to deal with the inevitable (and numerous) naysayers any person, brand, emotion, opinion or fact will face while being online.  It’s the beauty of the Internet…(assumed) anonymity at every turn; no foreseeable consequence for any action (words of intent) perceived or proclaimed. Granted, some of that which is published would very well be spoken in person if the incendiary voice was given the opportunity (I am the first to admit how unsurprised I am with what folks are willing to say in public forum or, incrementally more disgustingly, believe they are entitled to).

But we never take the time to dive into the root of the problem and see what we can be doing to prevent the trolls from ruling the roost.

Sure, we sit back idly and listen how BP isn’t using social media to the best of its ability to broadcast information at light speed or how Southwest didn’t respond quickly enough to Kevin Smith’s onslaught of “too fat to fly” villainy. But why all the “hate” in the first place?

Your psychologists and shrinks, alike, will tell you that the hatred on the web has its basis in the desensitization of communication spawning from the lack of human contact.  Think about that…how many times do you leave a crappy comment on a blog or news article you don’t agree with? Is it more or less then the amount of times you call the weatherman an “ass” for getting the weather wrong again today? And for that matter, is that number more or less then the amount of times you catch somebody on the way to work and go out of your way to say that you think their outfit is inappropriate?

My intuition tells me that if you look at your last 100 slights comprised of the above stimuli, the breakdown would be (pseudo-estimated) as follows:

  • 84 non-constructive critiques of online publications
  • 15 middle-fingers offered to the weatherman
  • 1 braver than brave muffled comment to the woman in the oh-too-short skirt

My rationale for this assumption is nothing new: the less we know of a person, or the further they feel away from us, the more likely we are to disagree, argue or straw man the hell out of them.  Of course it’s easier to call a blogger a jackass for something he wrote offhandedly, I never have to see him (except in that goofy avatar he published, which makes me despise him even more) and the only chance of confrontation or push back I receive is from a streaming pile of crap that is either attacked or echoed in a comment thread.

This is the same problem that has been plaguing brands for years…how do we humanize the conversation?

We’ve upped this dilemma by bringing our content and wares online; not only do you have the task of trying to humanize your already sedentary brand, but now you have to do it where folks aren’t afraid to tell you what they really think.

But, with the advent of the social media sphere we find hope in Pandora’s Box…the act of informal conversation as mediator.

So now that we’ve answered the why, we can dive into the “new customer service response,” how to manage legalese and growing your living, breathing brand online.

Photo courtesy of °Florian’s Photostream on Flickr