bad buzz & very bad buzz research findings
TRANSCRIPT
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
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
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?
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
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?
BAD BUZZ: MAIN TRIGGERS
40% of bad buzz situations result from miscommunication
Communication40%
Other initiatives (behavior, …)
60%
EVENTS THAT TRIGGER A BAD BUZZ
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
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
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?
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
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
1Communication… not sufficient!
54%46%
IMPACT OF COMMUNICATION
Bad buzz that is less critical
No positive impact
WHAT ARE THE MOST EFFECTIVE REACTIONS?
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?
REACTION TO AVOID: CENSORSHIP
Nearly 30% delete negative comments on Facebook
Delete negative comments
27%
Don't73%
CENSORSHIP ON FACEBOOK
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.
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/