5 Points

For almost four days now, Nestle, the company responsible for Kit Kats and other delicious treats, has been taking a huge amount of fire on its Facebook page thanks to Greenpeace, the international environmental organization, who accused Nestle of double-talk after it was revealed that the company uses non-renewable Palm Oil in its products.

That’s nothing new. The dark side of Facebook pages is that anyone can become a fan and comment to them – for better or for worse. What’s astonishing about Nestle’s response is that over the space of four days, they’ve taken a problem that would have been completely forgettable and fuelled the fire with a series of incredibly stupid social media blunders. Insulting fans, threatening to delete comments – the list runs on and on. Check out a perfect example of Nestle's social media blundering:


With the mainstream media referring to Nestle’s Facebook page as “social media suicide,” a question is raised – how should companies respond to criticism on their Facebook pages? Here’s a list of Do’s and Don’ts in case your company ever ends up in the Facebook Fan Page hotseat:


  1. DON’T insult your fans. Under any circumstances. Nestle’s biggest mistake was letting a juvenile social media “expert” have full reign over their Facebook page, not vetting his responses before they were posted. Look above at his outrageously condescending tone and the way he goads and insults fans, out in the open where the entire world can see it.
  2. DON’T delete posts. In the world of social networking, people keep records, and people notice when their posts are deleted. Censoring and silencing your critics will only add fuel to the fire. As bad as it might seem to have criticism showing up on your Facebook page, it’s infinitely worse to have the mainstream media pick up on your censorship.
  3. DON’T respond at all until you have something positive to say. Nestle’s mistake was responding to criticism BEFORE they had a plan in place. By the time Nestle announced their plans to use 100% renewable palm oil by 2015, the damage was already done – nobody was willing to listen. Resist the knee-jerk impulse to respond to criticisms and bide your time until you have a plan.

  1. DO engage your customers in discussion after you have something positive to say. Addressing their concerns is the best way to defuse a situation. Chances are that your social media team isn’t going to be the ones responding to an uproar like Nestle’s – your PR department should handle that, and they should be giving the social media team the materials they need to respond.
  2. DO vet EVERYTHING that your designated social media representative says. Under NO CIRCUMSTANCES should a brand as big as Nestle be making comments that aren’t approved by PR before being published. Nestle wouldn’t let just anybody speak to the press – why, then, would they allow him to speak directly to the people?
  3. DO damage control. When a situation flares up on your Facebook page, TAKE IT SERIOUSLY. Failure to recognize what starts out as a small problem on Facebook will eventually lead to it being picked up by the mainstream media, at which point it’s become a complete fiasco.

You’d think these six do’s and don’ts would be so basic that any company would understand them, but Nestle proved this weekend that even some of the world’s largest companies have absolutely no idea what to do when a crisis flares up on their Facebook page. If your brand doesn’t have a plan in place for a situation like Nestle’s, make one now. It’s all too easy and all too fast to fall victim to brand assassination like this.

Mar 22, 2010

Share this post on:

Comments
Twittown Comments
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Jun 23, 2010 15:46 says:

Am I the only one who thinks this Paul Griffin is a complete idiot though? It's like he reread 1984 a few too many times. He's playing around in his little social media fantasyland, bringing down "Big Brother." I mean, shut up already. Then, he couldn't even understand the meaning of "oh please"...someone should kick him off the internet.

I actually like Nestle's responses. Cocky as all hell...but accurate and sensible at least.

Submitted by saint (not verified) on Mar 28, 2010 01:04 says:

nestle has another problem - it has stopped talking with people. wtf they are thinking?

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Mar 24, 2010 09:58 says:

@Jason - You're right. Nestle is well within it's legal rights to delete those comments. They're also well within their legal rights to insult their customers. They're also well within their legal rights to continue to use non-renewable Palm Oil, which is how this fracas got started in the first place.

This isn't about legal rights. It's about strategy, and it's about how they treat the environment and their customers. All of these things that are "legal" for them to do are incredibly stupid things to do in social networking - and the vast majority of the world (with the exception, it seems, of you) understands that.

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Mar 24, 2010 09:57 says:

@Jason - You're right. Nestle is well within it's legal rights to delete those comments. They're also well within their legal rights to insult their customers. They're also well within their legal rights to continue to use non-renewable Palm Oil, which is how this fracas got started in the first place.

This isn't about legal rights. It's about strategy, and it's about how they treat the environment and their customers. All of these things that are "legal" for them to do are incredibly stupid things to do in social networking - and the vast majority of the world (with the exception, it seems, of you) understands that.

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Mar 24, 2010 01:56 says:

Yes I think you are right, they are well within their rights to delete comments posted altering their logo.

But the question is should they? Or is there a better, softer way to accomplish the same thing or even a compromised solution that is satisfactory to both sides while keeping the rest of the community positive and constructive?

Also is it possible that critics could be customers? Just because they are critical on their facebook page doesn't mean that they don't buy their products.

Submitted by Jason (not verified) on Mar 23, 2010 23:36 says:

I think Nestle is well within its rights to delete comments posted by people who use an altered Nestle logo as their avatar. That protects the brand identity.

The people they are "insulting" are not fans, they are critics. If people are posting criticisms like that, they're not buying Nestle's products anyway.