Potentially Destructive Power of the Web to your Company's Reputation

[Tom Snyder]

Just read a great article in an industry publication about how badly businesses can be hurt by Web sites that cater to groups of people who are enraged by their lack of service, quality, integrity, etc.

The truly great companies know that by finding every opportunity they can to be in touch with their clientele and target market. So they scour the Web to find out what the market is saying about them, positively and negatively, and they respond by initiating market driven improvements.
 
The companies that don't get it, or simply don't care, leave themselves open to incredibly destructive "market buzz."  While moderated sites (like MilwaukeeHDTV) and chatrooms facilitate particularly damaging market perception, sites that are developed for the sole purpose of dissing a company (Lowesblows.com, deltasucks.com), are even more damaging.  They are damaging because 1.) they will come up in the search engines directly behind the company they criticize and 2.)  The company has virtually no recourse. The courts have ruled that, because they represent free speech, and do not attempt to use the trademark owner's brand to sell merchandise, that critics are within their legal right to register a domain name.

Again, the companies that "get it" make sure they register all dismissive variations of their company name (pepsisucks.net, pepsiblows.org, etc.). in case their service or product ever drops to a level that a market segment would be angry enough to mount an organized critical attack.

I mention all this as prelude to the fact that after I read the article, I discovered that foxsux.com is an available domain name.  At least at the moment.  I'm thinking about what we want to do with that.

[Todd Wiedemann]

Whoa. That'd be one wicked registration.

[Tom Snyder]

Problem is that "whoever" who want to do such a thing would go into hock grabbing all the ones we, er, THEY could (should?)...

foxsux.com, foxsux.net, foxsux.org...

and of course foxsuxmilwaukee.com, .net. org.

[Gregg Lengling]

I've been watching this type of thing for about 2 years now...there is a website for pissed off Nextel customers and ex-customers ...called of course Nextelsucks.org

Of course Nextel kept threating litigation and finally did file a suit earlier this year...however since I haven't heard much lately, it probably didn't get past the judge to make it to trial.

[Tom Snyder]

A few years ago, I had an issue with a credit card company that had bought a company that held a loan of ours. They sent our interest rates through the roof, and were charging the interest on an incorrect balance. As we tried to get it straightened out, they reported us to the credit report companies.  

Unresponsive, condescending and infuriating.

I registered (theirname)sucks.com and set up a Web site for others to post their complaints about the same company. They threatened me with litigation. I told them I'd take down the site when they took care of the rates, the balance and our credit report.

It was amazing how quickly they fixed it all!

[Joseph S]

Sinclairsucks.com and many other pleasant names are still available to those interested.

[Kevin Arnold]

What's interesting is that Sinclair really doesn't care what you think of them. Even when their spokesman posts on various forums, the post is often more "smartalecky" than not. Perhaps this is because Sinclair has no direct contact with consumer and has no need for brand awareness. I would bet that 99.5% of viewers have no idea who owns Chs. 18 or 24 and probably couldn't care less. I'd think Sinclair is bulletproof about this.
Fox, however, is a different story. They promote their brand name both locally and nationally. Which makes it difficult to explain their attitude.