Target Facebook fan leaves a comment on the Target wall on the weekend of the 12th August, admonishing Target for their ‘trampy’ children’s clothing. Post receives 44,000 likes and 2300 comments in just over 24 hours.
Online, the crisis stayed on Facebook. While Target do have an Aussie twitter account, low use and low followers didn’t provide a big enough soap box for engagement. Leakage into Fairfax online dailies saw the crisis gain wider attention, and it would be very interesting to see the analytics on the Target site after the articles were published.
What Did They Do Wrong?
Crisis was pretty well handled, and closed out efficiently.
- Quicker response might have seen the crisis contained more rapidly. As is so often the case with this sort of brand attack, the brand is often stunned and delays response, either due to poor internal comms (waiting for internal info / comms / legal / etc.)The slow response can allow the crisis to gather momentum, and finally find their way into a journalists waiting arms.
- Target claim that the original post was ‘removed’ by Facebook. I’m not 100% sure that’s accurate, but happy to give them the benefit of the doubt and at least applaud a good excuse. Could be misconstrued as censorship though.
What Did They Do Right?
Quick response, good tone of voice when engaging with ‘fans’, and a solid attempt to take the conversation offline by providing an email address. Target closed out the crisis by providing;
- understanding of the issue
- A road map to address the issue
- an ‘offline’ avenue for fans wishing to continue the conversation
- an official response
- An understanding and consistant tone of voice throughout the crisis.
- Monitor your social pages in order for containment to occur at a faster rate.
- Ensure internal comms cover social media response.