Analysis of the trends behind companies' complaints following a shitstorm
A statistical analysis of Danish digital media regarding 25 selected shitstorms mentioned in 2,146 articles, where companies have recalled a product/campaign or apologized for a mistake/decision after a shitstorm. The analysis highlights the significant consequences for Danish businesses.
SAFEonNET has analyzed similarities and differences in shitstorms. The study aims to provide an overview of a typical shitstorm, where companies choose to apologize or recall after criticism from consumers and the media. The analysis is based on 25 selected shitstorms that have occurred within the last five years, where the company, after criticism, has apologized for a mistake or recalled a criticized product or campaign. Common to all cases is that companies have mainly received negative coverage in both social and digital news media in Denmark. It is a two-part analysis, where one part establishes how long it takes before companies choose to apologize or recall after criticism in social and digital news media. The second part is based on the evolution and characteristics of the shitstorm in digital news media. However, the analysis does not indicate how extensive the negative coverage has been on social media.
The analysis showed that all shitstorms are different, as there was no one-sided trend regarding how the negative coverage occurred. The negative coverage erupted in very different proportions and times, depending on the company and the unique characteristics of the event. This means that a potential shitstorm is of an unknown size and can therefore be very difficult to prepare for. Especially if one does not have the right expertise and the right tools. The standard deviation indicates the average deviation of the number of articles from the average of written articles. SAFEonNET's dataset showed the standard deviation to be 194 articles, which is significant, as an average of 86 articles is written per shitstorm. This means that the size of shitstorms, measured by the number of articles, varies widely. The analysis further showed that four out of the 25 analyzed companies accounted for 77% of the negative coverage (1,660 out of 2,146 articles). This reinforces the hypothesis that there is an unpredictable difference between shitstorms.
Companies react quickly
The analysis showed some trends regarding how many days the affected companies took to apologize or recall. On average, it took them two days to do so, which indicates a trend that companies understand the seriousness of the digital reality, are aware of the consequences, and recognize the power of consumers and the media.
Companies recall and/or apologize on average within 2 days
Already within one day's negative coverage on social media, 17 out of 25 (68%) of the companies chose to take one of the aforementioned actions. Within two and three days, respectively, 20 out of 25 (80%) and 21 out of 25 (84%) of the companies either apologized or recalled. For the remaining 4 companies, this was done after four, five, seven, and nine days, respectively. This means that all companies withdraw or apologize within ten days of negative coverage.
“Even if you as a business feel that you are right, you must engage in dialogue with the customer – every time. And you must be able to swallow your pride if necessary. Otherwise, you risk the situation getting out of hand because the customer feels that their dissatisfaction is not taken seriously.”
William Atak, CEO
How long does a shitstorm last?
Based on the 25 analyzed cases, a shitstorm ends after eight days, which aligns well with the fact that 87% of newspaper articles are published within seven days and 94% within 10 days. The articles that are published afterwards are mostly articles written by news media that take longer to react. There may also be other news related to the case or new events in the same case that draw the world's attention back to it. After 14 days, 99% of all articles have been published, which demonstrates, in most cases, that a shitstorm is 'dead', and there will be no further coverage in news media, but the challenges for companies thereafter are the digital legacies from the shitstorm, such as negative content on Google.
*No further articles were written by digital news media
The average shitstorm lasts about 8 days
87% of the negative publicity occurs within 7 days
99% of the negative publicity occurs within 14 days
Large companies are more exposed
Depending on the size of the coverage, large companies are significantly more exposed than small and medium-sized companies. Large companies are characterized by having over 500 employees. 82% or 1,753 out of 2,146 of the articles dealt with companies with over 500 employees, indicating that smaller businesses are not as interesting for the news media to write about.
82% of the negative mentions concerned companies with +500 employees
Furthermore, in an average shitstorm, there are 22 digital news outlets reporting on companies with over 500 employees. In comparison, 14 digital news outlets, on average, report on companies with up to 500 employees. This also demonstrates a trend where larger companies are more likely to be in the media spotlight. This is primarily due to the fact that the larger the companies are, the more people the negative coverage will be relevant for. This also means that the attention and traffic the media generates is of greater interest to readers, and thus to the media itself.
36% more digital news media report on companies with +500 employees
Leaders Take Responsibility
When companies apologize, it matters who is doing it. 80% of the individuals who apologize hold a leadership position. This suggests that companies take a shitstorm very seriously and try to mitigate the negative publicity in the best possible way. A person in a leadership position exudes far more authority and sincerity when they apologize than a random employee. This is because a leader typically acts as one of the company's front figures and therefore should take responsibility for its actions.
More than half apologize on Facebook
SAFEonNET's analysis showed that 52 percent of companies choose to apologize on Facebook. This social media is the place where many of the analyzed shitstorms either started or went viral. On Facebook, there is potential for the apology to be seen and read by a lot of people. This can also happen with relatively few resources on Facebook, which other media cannot compete with. In addition, one can respond very quickly, as one is the primary sender, and the message is communicated according to the intention.
The following companies have been included in the analysis: Movia, Yousee, Coop, Maersk, Cover, Bilka (two different shitstorms), Aqua d'or, Kvickly, HK, Apacta, Arla, Matas, Red Cross, Joe & The Juice, Jobindex, Irma, TV2, Aleris-Hamlet, DR, The Danish Food House, TV3, Rynkeby, Skøn and Trendyliving.