Customer Dis-Service & The Power of Social Media

Recently I went on a trip to Rome and Athens with my spouse, a Latin teacher at a public school in Massachusetts (yes, friends, they still teach Latin at some public schools). We were a group of 24 students and four chaperones. We booked and planned the travel through Mariden USA, a company that arranges such travel.

This blog post recounts our poor experience with Mariden USA and how I am using social media to ensure others in higher education do not have a similar experience. I wrote this post on behalf of my spouse, who as a teacher does not have the time to devote to this (fortunately I do, as one of my roles at MIT is to monitor and be engaged in social media).

First you'll read a edited review of the trip (from planning to execution) that I posted on Mariden USA's Facebook page. Then you'll check out a list of places where I posted the review (or a version of the review). If you're interested more in "the power of social media" aspect of this blog post, simply go to the Mariden USA Facebook page and you'll see their reaction to this account.

Particularly relevant to my social media mini-campaign is Mariden USA's protestation that we're "wasting energy writing bad reviews" about the company: When you get underwhelming (or in this case, bad) service, social media gives you a outlet to share that information with others.

* * *

Mariden USA was consistently and continually underhanded and duplicitous in the planning of our trip. Initially my spouse was told everything she wanted to hear, but, sadly for her students, the reality was far different than the false promises we heard from Mariden USA representatives.

FLIGHTS: My spouse selected Mariden USA because company representatives said they could get direct flights from Boston to Rome and returning from Athens to Boston. Many direct flights are available. Mariden USA representatives understood this was a priority of my students. Not only did we end up with layovers, but also these layovers unnecessarily prolonged the trip, eating away hours that could have been spent touring sites in Rome and Athens.

Mariden USA representatives also informed my spouse that our group would travel together: This, after all, is the definition of group travel. However, Mariden USA split up our group. My spouse was forced to involve an attorney in our perfectly justified efforts to compel Mariden USA to do what was right--that is, to amend the travel plans so that all her students traveled together.

In addition to denying her students the experience of traveling together in one group, Mariden USA denied compensation to the three travelers in the separate group. Reviewing the correspondence, it is obvious Mariden USA denied compensation because I engaged an attorney to convince them to honor their verbal commitment to her and our group.

LATE FEES and RECORD KEEPING: Where Mariden USA exhibited poor planning for our legitimate travel and itinerary requests, such disregard did not carry over to their relentless pursuit of so-called late fees from parents.

Ironically, Mariden USA was able to assess late fees to my participants, yet was not sufficiently organized to send invoices of fees due prior to sending notifications of late fees. This pursuit of late fees without sending invoices was a offensive attempt to wring more funds from parents. Mariden USA's consistently poor record keeping passed on a great deal of extra work and stress to my spouse, the customer.

DURING THE TRIP: Mariden USA's poor scheduling, abysmal planning, and lack of attention to detail repeatedly manifested itself while on our trip.

Although our guide in Rome, Alex, was truly exceptional, the fact remains that because someone in Mariden USA's office did not pre-plan and realize the Vatican would be closed on a Sunday (a fact generally clear to most of the world¹s population), we had to spend six extra hours on the bus because the scheduled trip to Pompeii was moved to Sunday from the more logical original plan of seeing it on the way to the ferry on Monday.

On Monday on the ferry from Bari, Italy, to Patras, Greece, we had to withdraw 598 Euro from our own savings to pay for the dinners and breakfasts for her students. These meals were clearly indicated as included in our overall bill, as contracted by Mariden USA. Although this blatant breach of contract was ameliorated several days later via Mariden International's reimbursement of these funds, our group should never have been put in this situation.

Also, while enduring a six-hour layover in Paris en route to Rome on 4/14, two flights left to Rome earlier than ours from our terminal alone. By our calculations, the flights and Pompeii trip inefficiencies wasted an entire day of touring.

The pity of these wasted hours is not the inconvenience but rather the disservice to the students whom Mariden USA purports to accommodate.

SUMMARY: The sole bright spots were the consummate professional tour guides we had both in Rome and Athens. They were professional, prepared, responsible, respectful and understanding. Not surprisingly, to our understanding, our guides were arranged by Mariden International, which apparently has higher customer service standards than Mariden USA. My spouse and I strongly advise her colleagues against traveling with Mariden USA.

* * *

Now, to the places where I posted this review (or a version of it)... in addition, of course, to the Better Business Bureau:

• - Teachers.net
• - Yahoo local
• - Yelp.com
• - CitySquares
• - YellowPages.com
• - Yellowpagesgoesgreen.org

The point, friends, is that social media gives you the power to mount a one-person outreach campaign.

So the next time you get service you don't like, do something about it: Voice your complaint through social media.

Delta, Delta, Delta Needs Some Helpa, Helpa, Helpa: Code Share w/ Saudi Arabia Airlines is Indefensible

Delta Air Lines recently announced that Jews and Israelis (or passengers carrying any non-Islamic article of faith) will not be able to fly code-share flights from the U.S. to Saudi Arabia under the airline's new partnership with Saudi Arabian Airlines that is set to begin in 2012.

The bone-headed move is generating a firestorm of negative PR for Delta (which will probably force the airline to rescind the policy) and a stream of correspondence to the U.S. State Department from concerned citizens--regardless of religious affiliation.

I am opposed to the U.S. entering an "open skies" agreement with Saudi Arabia so long as that government maintains its policy of not allowing entry into Saudi Arabia of any American citizen who is either:
1) of the Jewish faith; or
2) has an Israeli exit or entrance stamp in his/her passport.
Saudi Arabia currently maintains both of these patently discriminatory prohibitions.

If Saudi Arabia or some other country had a visa policy that prohibited the entry of, say, Black American citizens, the State Department would never countenance entering a "open skies" agreement with a country that maintained such a patently discriminatory policy. Indeed, I would think the U.S. Government would not even allow the airline of that country to operate at all the United States, much less to do so with all the advantages of a "open skies" agreement.

Perhaps certain people in the U.S. State Department who administer such affairs believe that Jewish American citizens can be treated differently and that discrimination against them by a country like Saudi Arabia is acceptable merely because it is part of the Saudi "visa policy."

The U.S. State Department must act immediately to insist that Saudi Arabia abandon its two discriminatory prohibitions as a condition of enjoying all the advantages of a "open skies" agreement with the U.S. Now that the dispute has become public, it is up to Secretary Hillary Clinton to take the lead on pressuring Saudi Arabia to reverse these offensive discriminatory prohibitions.

In a statement to Religion News Service on Thursday (June 23), Delta said it "does not discriminate, nor do we condone discrimination against any protected class of passenger in regards to age, race, nationality, religion, or gender."

Cowering behind the statement that it is adhering to the visa policies of Saudi Arabia, Delta's stance is hypocritical, feckless and indefensible. With the airline now publicly accused of implementing a "no-Jew fly policy", it's only a matter of time until the U.S. public forces the airline to do what the U.S. State Department should have done as soon as it learned of the proposed Sky Team Alliance agreement.

Why Big Oil Will ALWAYS Lose the High Profits-High Gas Prices PR Battle

Pity poor Exxon, "demonized" in the media for earning a record of almost $11 billion in profits in the first quarter of 2011.

Pity Ken Cohen, Exxon's embattled Vice President of of Public and Government Affairs, whose pugnacious response sought to decouple Exxon's profit from increasing gas prices at the pump.

Pity them, because no matter how logical, reasonable or well-parsed Cohen's statement was, the American public will always equate rising fuel prices with higher profits for Big Oil.

From a public relations perspective, it's easy to understand why Cohen sought to explain how the two issues (Big Oil profits and high gas prices) are separate: By providing a coherent, rational explanation, he wanted to get ahead of the story.

The problem for Cohen--indeed, Big Oil overall--is that when gas hits $4 or $5 a gallon, the American public isn't coherent or rational. It's angry. And trying to defuse raw anger with rational thought is like trying to douse a fire with... gasoline. It makes it worse.

And this, friends, is precisely what Cohen's statement has done.

Here's what he said in the lengthy statement sent to reporters: "We understand that it's simply too irresistable for many politicians in times of high oil prices and high earnings-they feel they have to demonize our industry."

He lashed out at the task force recently created by the Obama administration to crack down on speculation in the oil market, adding the fact that federal and state taxes make up 40 to 60 cents of the price for a gallon of gas, versus the 7 cents per gallon that Exxon Mobil earns.

He further argued that most of Exxon's profit comes from its overseas operations, and that earnings in its refining business, which converts crude into oil and diesel, make up only 6% of its earnings.

What did the public hear? "We made $11 billion in profit this past quarter, and as gas prices continue to increase, we're going to make even more money next quarter."

Better he had endured the momentary media excoriation, saying nothing until tomorrow, when the media's (and the American public's) attention will be focused on the Royal Wedding.

Attention! A Brief Post About a Little Blue Pill

Today in history marked a momentous step in male-female relations: In 1998, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved use of the little blue pill Viagra. As we all know by now, "Vitamin V" is a oral medication that treats impotence. Viagra took sex in a completely new... direction (I'll spare you the obvious applicable rhyming word for 'direction').

Anyway, Sildenafil (Viagra's chemical name) was originally synthesized and studied to treat high blood pressure. This little fact makes me wonder about the testing protocols scientists applied to the development of Sildenafil: I'd like to know exactly how chemists at Pfizer discovered that while Viagra had little effect on high blood pressure, it could induce penile erections.

Seeing the economic opportunity in the effect of Viagra, Pfizer elected (again dispensing with the obvious rhyme) to market the drug for impotence. Sildenafil was patented in 1996, and just two years later the FDA approved it for use in treating "erectile dysfunction," a fancy new clinical name for impotence.

The "little blue pill that could" was immediately successful: It flew off the shelves into the medicine cabinets of middle-aged men and of course the scripts of late night comics.

In just its first year, the $8-$10 pills yielded about a billion dollars in sales. Even the distinguished almost-octogenarian Senator Bob Dole marketed Viagra on TV, confessing to ED (one imagines, much to the chagrin of his long-suffering but suddenly happy spouse). This kind of direct-to-consumer marketing was new to the prescription drug industry and changed forever the sales and marketing of pharmaceuticals: Today, sales and marketing account for approximately 30% of the pharmaceutical industry's costs, in some cases more than research and development.

Viagra's success stimulated (come on, there's no other word for it) a wave of competitors (and equally embarrassing commercials for) Cialis (tadalafil) and Levitra (vardenafil).

As with many drugs, Viagra's long-term effects on men's health remain unclear ironically, Viagra warns those who suffer from heart trouble), but its popularity is unabated: The latest data says that more than 20 million Americans have tried it, a number which will no doubt get bigger (it's just too easy) as the baby boomer population ages... and they want to relive the Summer of Love (again and again and again).

Cheers, Little Blue Pill.

The Definitive Post on Social Media: My Two Cents

Any conversation about marketing and communications strategy these days involves social media. This is as it should be; social media is an important component of any marketing (big M) and communications (capital C) strategy. In this blog post you'll discover why I (and many savvy marcomm pros) believe social media is way overhyped and overrated.

When you've finished reading this post, please add your comment.

This blog entry is inspired by a truly insightful article at TECHi.

To be done engagingly, effectively, and consistently, social media marketing must be a full-time job. Small business owners can't do it full time; they haven't the resources. The best they can do is hire someone, generally a self-described "Social Media Expert", who claims to know how to establish a small business' social media footprint but doesn't take the time to know the business. PR Agencies and Ad Agencies are falling over themselves to hire "social media managers", usually fresh-out-of-college graduates who've never planned or managed a comprehensive marketing communications strategy.

What small business owners need to do is FIRST, carefully consider their target audiences and available resources and SECOND, determine the social media platforms that give your business the most visibility. Don't rush to be on Facebook if you're not updating your status daily. Don't fly to Twitter if you're not Tweeting several times a day. Don't be on YouTube if you've got no compelling videos. Don't be on LinkedIn if you're not answering questions, participating in discussions, or completing your profile. Not all platforms are relevant or appropriate for every business.

Choose wisely, because if you seek to be everywhere in social media you'll get nowhere.

One social media approach doesn't fit all, and if some self-proclaimed expert suggests you need to be everywhere, she or he has just indicated to you their fundamental misunderstanding of the marketing and communications purpose of social media. It's one component of a carefully considered and thoughtfully implemented marketing and communications strategy: Not a panacea.

Small business owners, marketers, social media experts: What do you think?

When Product Recalls Go Too Far... Or, "It's Someone Else's Fault I'm an Idiot"

I'm a big fan of the Consumer Products Safety Commission (CPSC). Its laudable charge: To protect the public from unreasonable risks of serious injury or death from thousands of types of consumer products. At any one time, the CPSC's website posts bulletins of thousands of product recalls--product defects that can (and often do) injure or kill unsuspecting consumers.

The CPSC's work to ensure the safety of consumer products - such as toys, cribs, power tools, cigarette lighters, and household chemicals - contributed significantly to the 30% decline in the rate of deaths and injuries associated with consumer products over the past 30 years.

Many of the product recall notifications get posted by companies with integrity (hard to believe in the face of such overwhelming evidence of avarice that such a characteristic still exists in corporate America).

I'll admit to trolling the product recall notifications to catch a company's poor product engineering, or worse, gross negligence. But today I came across a product recall that were the threat not so serious would have caused me to guffaw.

Here's the headline of the notification, friends: The Gerson Company Recalls Glass Vases Due to Laceration Hazard

As it turns out, unbelievably, the glass vases can shatter on impact, potentially causing lacerations to unsuspecting consumers who ostensibly try to clean up the shards. The recalled vases, MADE IN CHINA (another shocker) are made of clear glass and stand about 4" wide x 20" tall.

Imported by the Gerson Company, of Olathe, Kansas, the vases were sold for about $15 at Michael's stores in the U.S. and Canada from July 2006 through March 2010. Thus far, the Gerson Company has received nine reports of the vase shattering, including nine reports of lacerations to the hands.

The remedy suggested by the company and the CPSC: "Consumers should stop using the recalled vase and discard them immediately."

So let me get this straight: Glass vase shatters on impact with hard object (presumably the floor or ground). Consumer tries to pick up glass shards. Hands get lacerated. Consumer calls company to complain. Company urges consumers to discard the vase immediately (presumably in the trash, where it can shatter and likely lead to further lacerations).

It seems to me that consumers bear some responsibility for getting their hands lacerated when they pick up shattered glass. Or have we reached the laughable point in our society at which someone other than us is culpable for any misfortune that befalls us?

Egregious, Unforgivable Typos Drive Me Crazy

OK, so I haven't blogged since June. It's not like I have legions of followers eagerly awaiting whatever words I convey through the blogosphere. I mean, there are enough blogoprophets already. If you're seeking something profound, read the Bible. Or Mad magazine.

And now, to my irregularly scheduled blog entry.

Today's topic: Egregious typos.

All these social media outlets have allowed "Everyman" to vomit more writing into the world--most of it worthless unreadable crap that punishes the eyes as it confuses the mind. Making matters worse, along with proper grammar, many of these would-be Heming(no)ways have wantonly disobeyed the sacrosanct rules of proper spelling: Your has become UR, night nite, tomorrow tmrw; the list goes on.

I've made my peace with the execrable spelling that emanates, like a putrid mist, from social media. But when I see a typo in a press release from a reputable organization, it really steams my windows.

Today's disappointment comes from Consumer Reports, which posted at PR Newswire this winner.

If you didn't jump at the click, you missed the use of the word 'waiver' when clearly 'waver' is the right word. But I won't throw the writer under the bus; instead, let's aim for the editors who missed this misuse: That is, the editors at Consumer Reports and the editors at PR Newswire. Shame on you all.