Thank you. Thanks for taking the time to write a detailed and well-thought out reply. And thanks for bringing up a very important point.

A response to a negative comment should occur in the same public forum it was voiced. That’s how you make sure the same people that saw the complaint see your response. That point was in my notes and in the responses I’ve given to people when I answer this question in person. When I reread the post, though, I completely failed to bring that across. That detail is hugely important, and I’m very glad somebody not only caught it but brought it to my attention. I’m adding a little to the post to clarify that point.

I’ll still defend the restaurant example, though. While I agree that the letter to the editor you suggest is a more direct parallel because it occurs in writing in a public forum, the bad service is a more universal experience and is likely to occur more frequently. It’s the right choice for this post.

You didn’t like the vagueness of my advice to apologize because it leaves the door open to the dodgy reply “we’re sorry for any inconvenience,” (which I think we all hate) but my very next line specifies you need to take responsibility for anything you’ve done wrong. It doesn’t seem like we actually disagree on what constitutes an acceptable apology.

I hadn’t considered echoing the public conversation in private, but I like it. You’ll be hearing from me soon.

First, the analogy of poor service in a restaurant does not hold. A complaint to a server or manager is done *in private*, not in public. Negative blog comments are terrifying precisely because they are visible to the world. A more apt comparison is a letter to the editor in your hometown newspaper. This is a brief statement, broadcast to readers and stored for all infinity as searchable text. (For example, note what happens when you search for a fine Indianapolis company, Compendium Blogware.) We should not treat negative comments like complaints; we should treat them as an invitation to dialogue.

Second, the advice suggests that the response should always begin with “apology.” This term implies a “an expression of regret.” But as we all know, there is a tremendous gap between “I’m sorry you were hurt” and “I’m sorry that I hurt you.” The former merely presents sympathy, but the latter accepts responsibility. You should never take responsibility for a customer feeling wronged unless you were actually responsible!

Instead, consider the negative comment as an opportunity to begin a public conversation, preferably as another public comment. If you did make a mistake, acknowledge your error. If you feel some recompense is in order, publicly state how you will resolve the issue.

Thanking the commenter is essential as well, and the post explains the correct rationale for doing so. However, your gratitude should be made public and should include the logic. If you only offer thanks in private, no one else will know about your philosophy on customer service. If you fail to publicly explain that you are grateful for negative comments because they provide a way to improve, no one else will know that you actually care about being better.

Finally, all of this public conversation should be echoed by an amplified private conversation. This will help the frustrated commenter to feel like you are not only acknowledging the situation to the world, but making a special effort to treat them right directly.

The Internet has changed marketing by transforming spheres of communication. Interactions between companies and customers are more likely to be public than ever before. No advice about web-based interaction can fail to assess public perception and findability of your efforts. When customers talk, we must listen and respond in the place where they are and manner they desire.

@robbyslaughter