Blogless

Imagine that a small startup exists, and that they provide off-site customer service infrastructure for companies that make software, web apps, etc. Pretty good idea, right? Many companies don’t provide this service, or don’t provide it well.

Now imagine that they create pages on their site for thousands of companies without their consent. They use the companies’ logos, look and feel, etc. to make their page look like an sanctioned location to get official support for these products. The only indication on the page that you’re not at an official support site is a badge that tells users that the company in question is “not yet committed to an open conversation.” They also sell ads to competitors’ websites on your page, unless you buy a plan for $100 a month. Pretty bad ideas, right? In fact, they sound downright malicious, and if they’re not, they’re horribly negligent design decisions.

Now imagine you’re an a-list blogger, that your company provides great (famous) customer service and support, and that you find out about your page on this off-site help resource. You’re obviously pretty upset. You write a blog post lambasting the company for their obviously shady practices, which ends up effecting change in the product. (Many of you will be aware by this point that this is a true story – it happened at the end of March.) Pretty good idea, right? I’m not so sure.

Titian, David and Goliath, 1540s

First off, let me say that in my opinion, the design decisions made on behalf of the startup in question were clearly unethical, and I believe that they should be held accountable for them. I personally will never use their service precisely because this incident showed me that they make decisions in a way that is at best cavalier and at worst only concerned with their own self-interest. Either way, I don’t want them making decisions about my information.

So what’s the problem? Didn’t the a-list blog post make sure justice was served? Not really. Why?

Once they were called out, the startup people were compliant to the point of obsequiousness. Of course! They were being taken to task on one of the most popular blogs in the design world. They did what anyone would have done who wanted to save their business and reputation. They made changes quickly in response to the criticism and were polite and professional in a very hostile environment. Their shamefaced behavior was first class. The problem is that this seems to have actually made them some friends.

Next to the startup’s deferential attitude, the a-listers started to look like bullies. This generalizes: If you’re big enough to be on the a-list, your criticism is probably always going to look like bullying. This is true even if you’re right, and even if, as in this case, it is pretty well-reasoned and even-handed. Since people incline to feel sympathy for the victims of bullying, especially when they’re “nice guys,” you’re helping them as much as you’re hurting them. When the blog post in question came out, it gave the startup a great opportunity to adopt what a BP PR advisor once called the reformed sinner persona. Ick.

In sum, the a-listers gave the startup what was probably the biggest moment of publicity in their company’s life, and it was a real softball.