bad buzz & very bad buzz research findings

16
BAD BUZZ 2015: RESEARCH FINDINGS 643 bad buzz situations since January 2015 ( 1) (1) Inventory of significant instances of a bad buzz on English and French websites BadBuzz February 2016

Upload: mmc-marie-muzard-conseil

Post on 13-Apr-2017

336 views

Category:

Marketing


1 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Bad buzz & very bad buzz research findings

BAD  BUZZ  2015:  RESEARCH  FINDINGS        

643  bad  buzz  situations  since  January  2015  (  1)

(1)    Inventory   of  significant   instances   of  a  bad  buzz  on  English   and  French   websites

Bad  Buzz

February   2016

Page 2: Bad buzz & very bad buzz research findings

WHO  ARE  THE  VICTIMS  OF  A  BAD  BUZZ?    

Worldwide  brands  are  no  longer  the  only  victims  of  digital  crises    

B  to  C55%Public  

administration,  public  firms…

SMEs18%

Associations/charities6%

B  to  B1%

PROFILE  OF  BAD  BUZZ  VICTIMS

Page 3: Bad buzz & very bad buzz research findings

They  are  markedly  different  from  the  victims  of  traditional  media  crises:

Media    &  Fashion  are  the  two  sectors  most  exposed  to  a  bad  buzz    

0%

2%

4%

6%

8%

10%

12%

14%

16%

18%

SECTORS  THE  MOST  EXPOSED  TO  A  BAD  BUZZ

Media

Fashion

Culture

Restaurant-­‐Hotel

Food

Hi  Tech  

Internet

Retail

Transport

Equipment

Other

WHO  ARE  THE  VICTIMS  OF  A  BAD  BUZZ?    

Page 4: Bad buzz & very bad buzz research findings

WHERE  DOES  A  BAD  BUZZ  BREAK  OUT?  

The  web is  where  a  bad  buzz  most  often  appears

93%

7%

PLACES  WHERE  A  BAD  BUZZ  APPEARS

Internet Traditional  media

Page 5: Bad buzz & very bad buzz research findings

Twitter &  editorial  websites*  are  the  main  places  where  a  bad  buzz  appears,   followed  by  Facebook

*  sites,blogs  

Websites   -­‐blogs 35%

Twitter  36%

Facebook21%

YouTube4%

Other   4%

PLACES  WHERE  A  BAD  BUZZ  APPEARS  ON  THE  WEB

WHERE  DOES  A  BAD  BUZZ  BREAK  OUT  ON  THE  WEB?  

Page 6: Bad buzz & very bad buzz research findings

BAD  BUZZ:  MAIN  TRIGGERS

40%  of  bad  buzz  situations  result  from  miscommunication    

Communication40%

Other  initiatives  (behavior,  …)

60%

EVENTS  THAT  TRIGGER  A  BAD  BUZZ

Page 7: Bad buzz & very bad buzz research findings

BAD  BUZZ:  MAIN  TRIGGERS

5  Taboos   explain  more  than  

60% of  bad  buzz:  ethnical*,  sexual  &  social  discrimination,  manipulation,   disrespect    towards  clients

*Ethnical  &  regional   discrimination

Ethnical/geographical  

discrimination18% Sexual  

discrimination13%

Manipulation11%Social  

discrimination10%

Disrespect  towards  clients

10%

Deviant  behavior  9%

Non-­‐ compliance  with  web  rules

4%

Animal  cruelty4%

Physical  discrimination

3%

Disrespect  towards  the  innocence  of  children

3%

Other15%

DIGITAL  TABOOS

Page 8: Bad buzz & very bad buzz research findings

WHEN  HIT  BY  A  BAD  BUZZ,  HOW  DO  ORGANIZATIONS  REACT?

Silence  is  no  longer  their  number  one  reaction.  Organizations(1)    prefer  to  communicate    

(1)    Companies,   associations,   charities,   other  organisations

Releasing   a  statement

84%

Keeping   silent14%

Keeping   silent  but  back  tracking2%

REACTION

Page 9: Bad buzz & very bad buzz research findings

Organizations(1)   are  less  likely  to  issue  a  mea  culpa

(1)    Companies,   associations,   charities,   other  organisations

Mea   culpa48%

No  mea   culpa52%

AMONG  THE  ORGANIZATIONS   WHICH  PUBLISH  A  STATEMENT

WHEN  HIT  BY  A  BAD  BUZZ,  HOW  DO  ORGANIZATIONS  REACT?

Page 10: Bad buzz & very bad buzz research findings

REACTIONS  ARE  NOT  ALWAYS  APPROPRIATE…

In    50%  of  cases,  the  response  of  the  organization(1)    

has  no  positive  impact:   it  does  not  calm  web  users  down

(1)    Companies,   associations,   charities,   other  organisations

50%50%

IS  THE  REACTION  EFFECTIVE?

Yes No

Page 11: Bad buzz & very bad buzz research findings

WHAT  ARE  THE  MOST  EFFECTIVE   REACTIONS  ?

1Communication:   a  necessary  condition…

76%

24%

REACTIONS  OF  THOSE  WHO  MASTERED  A  BAD  BUZZ

They  issued  a  statement They  didn't

Page 12: Bad buzz & very bad buzz research findings

1Communication…   not  sufficient!

54%46%

IMPACT  OF  COMMUNICATION

Bad  buzz  that  is  less  critical

No  positive  impact  

WHAT  ARE  THE  MOST  EFFECTIVE   REACTIONS?

Page 13: Bad buzz & very bad buzz research findings

2 Mea  culpa   is  an  effective  option

Bad  buzz   that  is  less   critical

76%

No  positive  impact24%

IF  MEA  CULPA

WHAT  ARE  THE  MOST  EFFECTIVE  REACTIONS?

Page 14: Bad buzz & very bad buzz research findings

REACTION  TO  AVOID:  CENSORSHIP

Nearly  30%  delete  negative  comments  on  Facebook  

Delete   negative  comments

27%

Don't73%

CENSORSHIP  ON  FACEBOOK

Page 15: Bad buzz & very bad buzz research findings

RESEARCH  METHODOLOGY

Study  of  the  English  &  French  web  from  January  1st,2015  to  December  31st,2015  to   identify  and  analyze  significant  cases  of  a  bad  buzz  affecting  companies  and  public  organizations  of  all  sizes  and  in  all  sectors.

A  significant  bad  buzz  (or  digital  crisis)  is  defined  as  any  controversy  which  happens  to  be  critical  of  a  company  or  an  organization    and  that  takes  place  at  least  in  two  different  locations  on  the  web  (at  a  significant  or  strong  level).  Some  may  be  “covered ”  offline  as  well.    

MMC’s  proprietary  methodology*  used  to  evaluate  the  efficiency  of  the  company/organization’s  tactics  when  hit  by  a  bad  buzz hinges  on  the  analysis  of  several  key  factors  such  as  the:  • Tone of  web  users’  comments  following  the  reaction  of  the  

company/organization• Evolution  of  the  number  of  “supportive”  and  “understanding”  

comments  and  opponents  

*  The  MMC  methodology   takes   also  other  factors  and  criteria  into  account  to  further   examine  

and  refine   the  evaluation.

Page 16: Bad buzz & very bad buzz research findings

MMC: the  expert  In  digital  crises

20 years  of  experience  in  crisis  

communication  management  &  6  years in  digital  crises

Empower  &  support  international  brands

http://mmc-­‐communication-­‐crise.com/