Many of us working in the social media/community management industry saw the train wreck that was Nestle on Facebook unfold in realtime last month. The subject has been hashed out so much since then that many of us are wondering when the references to ‘kick the horse orangoutang to death’ will stop. However, much of the online noise about Nestlé has been about their poor online community management, excerpt from that infamous day:
But a recent blog post by Cristina Aced, passed on to me by a friend, shed new light on the debacle that I hadn’t thought of previously. Given that the post is in Spanish let me summarize. Cristina’s post highlights three basic mistakes made by Nestlé:
- Create a fanpage for Nestlé when it isn’t a brand, but a corporation. Crunch is a brand, just like Kit Kat is a brand. (Axe Deodorant is a brand, Unilever is the corporation that owns Axe… and so forth).
- Censor Video Content
- Try to moderate online discussion.
Nestlé, well a pseudo confident spokesman, briefly discusses what went wrong:
I am not completely sold on the idea that corporations should not be treated like brands, at least in the social media realm. If Nestlé had a FB Kit Kat page (which they do) would it have changed anything? Would the reaction have been the same if Nestlé hadn’t denied GreenPeace’s claims?
Most likely not. It just would have played out on the Kit Kat page or worse, somewhere Nestlé might not have been able to monitor it.
If anything else, this is a great illustration of how quickly a reputation can be damaged. Often times with long lasting consequences, just take a quick scroll down the page to see what I mean (make sure you click the “Fans + Nestle” button-note: this happened a month ago and people are still angry). Also note, that Nestlé still has a fanpage. My question is should Nestlé have a page because it is a corporation or not?
I believe that backing out now would make an already bad situation worse, however that’s just my opinion.