Anti-marketing is not a business strategy, or at least it does not originate from the company. Anti-marketing is born in the customer as a defensive strategy for the consumer and that sometimes has disastrous consequences for the company.
In the past, what did we do when we felt cheated after buying a product or were treated badly when presenting a service? At best, we would call customer service or write a letter, and at worst, we would tell our friends and family to vent and warn them not to consume that product or service. this passed away and the truth is that now (thanks to the internet and social networks) the film is totally different. It all started when a client decided to create a website with the name “hatredXXX.com”. Of course, instead of XXX the name of the company in question would appear. In Spain, perhaps the most recognized case was detimofonica.com.
According to statistics, each angry person tells her story to an average of 20 people, who tell it to others, reaching a very significant number by word of mouth. In addition, today with social networks the message of complaint about a brand can be Slovenia WhatsApp Number List extended to thousands of people. Who has not made a complaint on Facebook or Twitter about a product or service that has not met their expectations and for which they have felt ripped off? Perhaps the most classic example is positive and negative hotel recommendations. I personally have done it at some time and I have almost always received a response from the company itself (through Twitter) offering me a solution or an apology, which is appreciated and I could become a consumer of that brand again.
Negative publicity is always much more effective than positive publicity because negative publicity comes from annoying consumers who have previous experience with that product or service and because positive publicity in most cases is produced from the company and, therefore, our Subconsciously he knows that the company emits advertising messages and consumers emit information and advice (almost always disinterested) about the brand.
What can a company do in the face of this new anti-marketing phenomenon? To begin with, assume it. An American multinational tried a lawsuit against a consumer for this reason but failed, since the US constitution defends the sacred freedom of expression. Many brands have found that a cocky and defiant attitude towards consumer complaints can only make the consumer in question more angry and many other consumers join him in his protest and boycott.
The best attitude to so-called “trolls” (users who speak ill of you on the internet) is to contact them to apologize and try to offer them the best possible solution to the problem to redirect that consumer to your followers again. In addition, consumer complaints can help the company to detect production problems, bad attitudes of employees, poor quality of service?
Many times the spark caused by anti-marketing is produced by a single person in the business chain, a telephone operator, a salesperson, a cashier? Thanks to the consumer complaint, the company management can find out which point of the gear is the one that is missing and remedy it before provoking more complaints that lead to a decrease in sales.
The best thing that marketers can do when faced with an anti-marketing situation is to listen to angry customers, solve their problems and adequately compensate them for the situation created. A consumer brought back from tension to satisfaction has more value than any other because, just as he told his problem to his acquaintances and on social networks, it is very likely that he will also tell about his solution.
Let us never forget that our best and most loyal customer is the most dangerous. He is used to good service and it is that from love to hate there is only one step (and vice versa)