Facebookjacking: When a company does not respond others win

Here's a fun Friday story that comes to us via Mark Copeman.

A 26-year-old named Thomas Cook posted a lighthearted message on the Thomas Cook UK Facebook page: "Seeing as I share the exact same name as your huge company, and because of this I have been ridiculed for as long as I can remember, I think it's only fair that you help compensate for this by giving me one of your lovely holidays."

When the big, famous travel agency (143,000+ Facebook likes) replied back to say "no" to the request, quick-thinking competitor lowcostholidays.com (81,000+ likes) jumped in to offer Thomas Cook (the person) a free trip to Paris.

"Here at lowcostholidays.com we completely sympathise with your suffering and if your name was “lowcostholidays.com” we would certainly have accepted your request to be sent away on a weekend in Paris,” Charlotte Hunt from lowcostholidays.com wrote. "...So how about we send you on that weekend in Paris?"

Thomas Cook (the person) took up lowcostholidays.com on the offer and then posted his experience. Media outlets in the UK including the Mirror picked up the story within the past 24 hours.

lowcostholidays.com has cleverly kept the meme alive with additional Facebook posts like After all this talk about Paris we thought we’d tell you a little more about why this city is so great...

Shall we call this Facebookjacking?

What Thomas Cook (the person) did was have some lighthearted fun on the Thomas Cook UK (travel company) Facebook page. In my opinion it was not a "demand" but just a way to poke some fun. Thomas Cook UK responded (which is good, they could have ignored it), but they failed to see the social media potential of the situation.

Kudos to lowcostholidays.com for monitoring the competitor's Facebook page and jumping in to seize the opportunity, thereby controlling the emerging meme. Maybe this should be called Facebookjacking?

When to respond. How to respond.

The challenge for companies in this new world is to figure out when to respond (and when to ignore). The number of people who request (or demand) stuff from you will increase as these sorts of stories go viral.

The basic rule to consider: Is this request thoughtful? How can we benefit from this? Or is the person making the request a bully or someone just out to score free goods or services?

If the person is thoughtful, they deserve a response.

But remember, you don’t always have to give someone exactly what they want. Thomas Cook UK could have sympathized with the person who shared a name with them and offered something else (even just a T-shirt) because that would show they cared.

When Dave Carroll posted United Breaks Guitars, United rightly didn't offer compensation (that would have opened up opportunities for thousands of people to demand similar treatment). But United missed a huge opportunity because they did not respond at all. Had they, for example, created their own video response (perhaps highlighting how bags are handled at O’Hare) they would have been seen as human and shared in Dave Carroll's triumph rather than being seen as the bad guys.

So if a situation like this happens to you, consider the request. Is it thoughtful? If so, respond! But respond with something equally clever.

Images via Imgur

Comments

[abdullah alghadouni]

brilliant food for thouhts

[Joe Gill]

People want to know if companies are even listening to their social media channels. Kudos to Thomas Cook for acting and thumbs down to Thomas Cook UK who dropped a major chance at great PR.

[Joseph Ratliff]

I personally don't know if I "fault" Thomas Cook UK for saying "no," and give them kudos for at least responding.

Yes, the PR opportunity would have been a match, but here's a scenario I'm pointing to (and I'm just playing Devil's advocate here)...

Because TC UK didn't take advantage of the PR opportunity in a way the public might not deem "acceptable," and if there is any negative fallout for TC UK as a result... is that right?

At least they did respond via the channel...right?

Perhaps TC UK had already spent their budget for PR and couldn't take advantage of the PR (it does require TC UK to pay for the trip)?

Is it right for the public, just because we have more and more access to businesses... is it right for us to make their decisions for them?

There is a line here where business decisions have to be made by the business, and not by the public...right?

Remember, I'm just playing advocate here. :)

[David Meerman Scott]

Joseph, you're right. Thomas Cook UK did respond. Good for them. But they did so in a corporate way rather than thinking though the social media possibilities around such an interesting situation.

[Dragan Mestrovic]

Hi David the domain http://lowcosttravel.com/ seems to be parked and a not active one.

[Penny Haywood Calder]

I like the term 'thoughtful' - a thoughtful person here in the UK would be regarded as considerate and caring in an almost old fashioned, but decent way. Hopefully the same associations are evoked in the US? Thoughtful is a great guiding star for communications, yet I wonder how many social media policies or customer care guidelines mention it?

[Raúl Colón]

As I search for companies named Raul Colon I have to wonder if other companies now will replicate that behavior.

On a more serious note. So many companies are so focused on themselves and promoting their stuff they clearly miss out on so much by not trying to show their communities and audience that they care.

The other company took a risk and it paid off! But most importantly you could see they where listening!

[David Meerman Scott]

Dragan - Thank you. My mistake. I corrected it.

Penny - Yes, same here in the US. That's my guide to if a person deserves a response.

Raul - Right you are. Most companies just talk about their own stuff.

[Kristi Sanders]

Great points. And it reminded me of what a UK maxipad company created in response to a snarky Facebook post they received. In case you haven't seen this video - it's exactly the kind of smart/funny response you recommend: http://jezebel.com/5952287/maxipad-company-replies-to-mans-facebook-rant-with-awe+inspiring-sarcasm

[David Meerman Scott]

Kristi -- LOVE IT. I had not seen that example before. Yes, that is exactly what I am talking about. Thanks so much for sharing.

[Luke Faccini]

Great article David. It's very clever marketing by LoCostHolidays, they deserve the results. It's an awesome case study for monitoring the competition!

[Tom Borgman]

In your response to Joseph, which I agree with, I think the main central point here is YES companies ARE forced to respond appropriately - in this case the manner you suggest - when/if THEY decide to play in the Socialsphere. They get all they deserve if they under-manage it. They shouldn't enter this space without that commitment. And of course, as soon as one says THAT, one can :-) project out to the ultimate end-game when the human species, being of herd mentality, might pile on a company, forcing them to (TC example) give out free tee shirts to ALL the Thomas Cooks of the world who might see that kindly and appropriate response. But then again, one could see THAT as a spontaneous club/affinity marketing kind of opportunity!

[David Meerman Scott]

Tom - If each person has on average 200 Facebook friends and if each person is likely to tell 25 people in person (plus any blogger or media interest), a t-shirt and a beer for every Thomas Cook in the world in order to get positive word-of-mouse is one heck of a lot cheaper than the traditional stuff like TV ads that so many companies spend money on.

[Kevin Weaver]

This was a great article. While I think it is important, and imperative, that companies regularly interact with their customers on social media platforms, couldn't something like this get a little out of control? If customers become accustomed to receiving free merchandise or services for simply me requesting something on a Facebook page, couldn't this have negative consequences for an organization? How does a company say "no" in a way that doesn't turn customers away? Sorry if this has already been brought up in the comments. I didn't see it anywhere.

[David Meerman Scott]

Kevin - yes of course. My point is the "thoughtful" aspect. Someone just demanding something for free should be ignored while someone who thoughtfully posts about their name being the same as the company's should be listened to. And always remember, that when something plays out in public (like this did) the public is watching. Yes, it is a new world with new rules.

[Paul Stallard]

Love it. If only my name was Jack Daniels.....

[Long Beach PC Expert]

Interesting article! And that term "Facebookjacking" seems really apt for these kinds of situation. Social media offers a huge opportunity for businesses to boost their sales and popularity. But it's also make or break, right? With just a like or a simple comment, it can make an impact to their marketing strategies. So it's better to be safe than sorry!

[Gurdeep Sangha]

Personally I believe Thomas Cook (the company) made a little bit of a PR disaster, whereas lowcostholidays.com played the situation to their advantage. With many forms of social media now available, companies are having to adapt to these new types of situations. Instead of sending a email, which can easily be ignored, an individual can post a message on a company's facebook site which has the potential to be seen by thousand. If the company chooses to ignore such messages, hundreds of others can post messages requesting the service to be offered. By this time it may be too little too late for the company.

[Travis Birt]

First time hearing this word Facebook jacking.. but others are doing jacking on facebook.