Tweeting Triumphs: Big Headlines!
It starts with a tweet. And you respond. While engagement generated by a public spat may be appealing to some, the lack of accountability in these interactions is evident. Especially if its unfunny. Some believe they are above critique and could respond in ways that reflect a need to control the narrative. Defensiveness and confrontation take precedence over accountability and transparency.
This dynamic is a key problem in today’s social media landscape: the tendency to prioritise personal standpoint over meaningful, solution-oriented conversations. A simple response would have been
Ola Electric Stock Drop: Not an Enjoyable Ride
In other news today, Ola Electric share price fell below Rs 90. At Rs 89.55, its shouldering a 8.38 percent drop. FADA reports Ola Electric’s 2024 September sales at 24,679 units.
While common, certain lines of argument are a problematic dynamic in public discourse, particularly on social media. Especially when confrontational tones and personal attacks often overshadow constructive conversation. Why is it such a common phenomenon?
Social Media: Where Politeness Goes to Die
When a company or individual is publicly criticised, most likely the tweet will be ignored, or there will be an automated robotic response about how they’re looking into the prob and customer care will contact them. But that pattern is likely to change if a tweet is from a known/popular entity. There could be great drama if you’re not nameless/faceless. An urge to defend oneself in the face of public criticism could be innate. So instead of even an iota of meaningful dialogue, one could deflect criticism with personal jabs. This behaviour could be from feeling personally attacked, even when the criticism was directed at the company, not the individual. Concurrently, a large audience gets sucked into it.
Is it difficult for CEOs or company leaders to separate themselves from their companies because their identity is often deeply intertwined with the brand they represent? Does criticism of the company feel like a direct attack on their personal competence, leadership, or vision? Does negative feedback trigger a need to protect not just the company’s reputation, but their own?
Brand reputation management – Choosing Silence
Do indian consumers have a voice?
Do they deserve this?
Two wheelers are many daily wage workers lifeline…@nitin_gadkari is this how Indians will get to using EV’s? @jagograhakjago any word?
Anyone who has an issue with OLA electric leave your story below tagging all… https://t.co/G2zdIs15wh pic.twitter.com/EhJmAzhCmt— Kunal Kamra (@kunalkamra88) October 6, 2024
On platforms like Twitter, exchanges tend to escalate quickly, as scrutiny and audience engagement create a high-drama environment. Aggressive responses often receive attention. It’s engagement farming without even having to try. When public figures engage in a public spat, especially on social media, it draws attention, increases engagement, and fuels conversations, even if the content itself is disparaging. A spectacle. Such responses, however unprofessional or personal, are likely to trigger strong reactions, be it support from loyalists or outrage from critics, which, in turn, increases visibility and keeps the brand in the public eye. The more attention one can draw, the more “buzz” one creates, regardless of whether it’s positive or negative.
A Code of Conduct outlines expected standards of behaviour as per company’s values and ethical standards. It’s even simpler to do as The Beatles sang, “Let It Be”, and choose not to respond to a tweet, as many have done countless times.
Source: Bike - rushlane.com
