Angry Birds: Part 2 of 2

Why this topic caught my fancy is that very recently I was involved in a little skirmish with ‘Fashion & You’ on twitter.

I had ordered a set of cushion covers for a birthday gift sometime in mid August. September came and went and there was no peep from them. No intimation about where the consignment was, whether the shipment had even been dispatched, nothing. When I followed up with them towards the end of September, they said four to five weeks delivery time was standard.

In this day and age of around 3 days delivery time from online shopping portals, four to five weeks seems criminal. But it was apparently mentioned somewhere in the fine print, so I had no cause to get annoyed with them.

Come mid October and I was still awaiting the cushions. After a few failed attempts to get a response from their customer service number, I was thoroughly peeved.

I had been hearing so much about consumer complaints getting a better response on social media, I decided to give it a try.Twitter worked. Although I had to keep chasing them for a response, my money was refunded back to me on the last day of October.

But after reading about the arrest of Mr Ravi Srinivasan, I went back and re-read my tweets!

I don’t think I was rude. I was irritated, disappointed and thoroughly pissed off. But I wasn’t rude. It was a pre-paid order and I really wanted to know what the heck was going on.

With the massive reach of social media, I can clearly see why resolving an issue on social media is important. But why would an organization respond to an irate customer on social media and not to a consumer complaint on another medium? Just doesn’t make business sense.

Though personally, I have not had much to complain to Vodafone but to my knowledge, the Vodafone India twitter handle is quite particular about resolving consumer complaints quickly. And even they were not so amenable to ‘social’ feedback till some time ago.

In June 2011, Vodafone India sent a legal notice to Dhaval Valia, who ranted about its 3G services on Facebook, asking him to take down the ‘defamatory’ posts. Dhaval, who used to be a Loop Mobile customer before, had switched to Vodafone in April to use its 3G services. However, it was not available where he lives, contradicting Vodafone’s claims.

The notice asked him to refrain from making any comments against the company and also remove the posts in 48 hours.

In reply, Dhaval had mentioned his plans to initiate consumer and criminal cases against the company, questioning the methods Vodafone had used to trace his updates, since he had posted them in a private environment.

Post this, Vodafone Essar withdrew the notice in good faith. They further went on to say something to the effect of - “Vodafone Essar would also like to take this opportunity to inform that as a customer obsessed organization, we have always welcomed critical feedback and suggestions from both direct and social media customers as it helps us to constantly improve ourselves to serve their discerning needs”.

I wonder who instilled this ‘good faith’.

Was it Facebook who realized the extent of access given to Vodafone was going to be open for all to see or was it Vodafone realized the PR nightmare this was about to become?

I understand the need to exploit this mine of personal information people so readily share on social media. There are marketing businesses built on top of the idea that third parties can get access to data on social networking websites. But what exactly is the extent of privacy that we are guaranteed when we post/tweet about something?

We all know that Facebook tracks our behavior while we are logged on the site. How many of us are aware that the tracking continued even when we log off?

In 2011, Facebook was involved in a scandal regarding this breach.

Facebook admitted that it had been watching the web pages its members visit even after logging out of the site.  The social networking site was forced to confirm that it has been constantly tracking its 750 million users, even when they are using other sites.

Facebook said that the huge privacy breach was simply a mistake - that software automatically downloaded to users' computers when they logged in to Facebook 'inadvertently' sent information to the company, whether or not they were logged in at the time.

Really? Inadvertently? I really don’t think so.

On checking the changes in ‘privacy policy’ made by Facebook on 11^th May 2012, I came across some rather interesting points:

• If you comment on something public, your comment will be public      
• All of the things you do and share on Facebook may be used to target you with ads
• Facebook may retain your data for extended periods if its subject to a legal request or obligation, governmental investigation, or investigations" into violations of Facebook's policies

This is certainly a wakeup call to be cautious about the use of social-networking sites. It's more public than you may think at the time you signed up for the hype. 

It would be wise to remember that the Internet never forgets. I am surely going to be careful while exercising my freedom of speech and expression.