Originally Posted by
Ukalien
why I told you "you were missing the point".
Am I correct in assuming that your point is similar to that expressed in another quote from
the article I linked?
"Think back to the days when we didn't have social media," she [Dias] says. "If your cable company jacked up your monthly bill, there would be a few of us that would grumble about it, but you'd pretty much suck it up. Maybe 1% of people would quit their cable company. What happens now is the 1% that quits actually does so with champagne and fireworks. They send off this huge flare across the Internet and people who may not have even noticed, who don't scrutinize every bill they get, suddenly are aware of it. The fear of executives is that the 1% who always complained and grumbled and maybe quit are now educating the 99% who were blissfully ignorant and working them all up into a lather. That's why companies move so quickly."
A very basic point is that the Internet provides a modern equivalent of the office water-cooler where people can gripe, but one that is infinitely more powerful, particularly if the gripes are justified (or justifiable).
Whether or not a company immediately responds, the fact remains that this new avenue of access offers unprecedented opportunities for individuals who are dissatisfied with the company's policies or actions to discuss them and to make others aware.