More than ever, we are living our lives publicly. As businesses, companies, entrepreneurs and private persons, we represent two sides of the identity coin – the private, where all the usual stuff happens (in case of businesses etc, that’s where you plan, design, budget, etc… all the things that are not necessarily public domain and that you have legal right in keeping to yourself; in private person case, this is where what you decide to keep of the privacy that you have a legal right to sits – from what you eat for breakfast to private decisions such as who you are dating to photos and videos that are recognisably of you but are published without your consent, etc), and the public, where we not only present ourselves in our own sphere – a consultant, a clothes brand, … – but also interact with public.
Meaningful interactions are currently very much in vogue. Under meaningful interactions, we understand standing up for human rights causes, explaining decisions that may influence others, especially where that influence may be disproportionate for some more than others (eg. vulnerable communities and building) and a certain amount of transparency in our dealings. However, it is also stretched, more and more, to include interactions with not merely the representatives of the public, or public related statements, but literal interaction with people in the spaces delineated for this interaction, such as social media. This is not always bad; Tory Burch zoomed with 35 fans /customers from Instagram in August to discuss what they love about the brand, which was likely hugely helpful with determining the brand’s next steps, while also offering a personalised approach when people needed it most (link). But all too often, the behaviours, demands and expectations of those we interact with in these spaces are not necessarily positive, let alone constructive.
Social media is, much like all our spaces right now, a place for anger, lashing out and deepfakes, as much as it serves other, better purposes. Moreover, in the era of aggressive ideologies and social wars, lashing out is often almost a form of expression of belonging to these ideologies, a type of badge of honour one can don after being “socially active” against the perceived “enemy, threat” of whatever represents their Other. And, of course, even without any ideological background, people take to the internet, notably Twitter, to be able to lash out somewhere where lashing out bears little to no consequences for them and definite consequences to their victims; between the personal pain of being derided, threatened, bullied or picked on and the potential of even a made up story garnering attention and gathering a following of people who will dog the victim as far as possible (again, with very few consequences), the potential of bad interactions is very real and something we often tell each other – and ourselves – we just need to take on board.
The question we should really be asking ourselves is – do we? Do we truly?
Or should we improve legislation surrounding this issue until bullying against anyone online, publicly or privately, is no longer as easy?
That aside, the question for most of us is how to deal when we meet with disparaging comments in public space?
Disparaging comments are the worst; they may be highly ruinous, personally and for the brand we represent, but they may not tick the boxes that would have them banned on the platform where they are posted. “You are stupid”, for instance, may or may not be enough, and yet it is a comment that is dropped very easily. It is not a gender, race, sexual orientation or other slur that may get the comment banned; if it happens cleverly enough, it might not count as harassment or bullying; indeed, it can just be put down to “opinion”, which is ultimately really bad for the victim and the handling of negative behaviour online, but perfect for the bully… they have achieved what they aimed for.
And even if they say nothing more, their comment may invite others, both real profiles and possible bots of people who wish to interact this way for their own reasons.
Not only is this a nightmare for anyone having to deal with it, a psychological slide into the abyss, but it can also have very real consequences for us as a public persona, brand or brand representative.
So how do we deal in this type of a situation?
First rule of internet used to be “don’t feed the trolls”. What this aims to do is discourage bullying through metaphorically ignoring and hoping they will go away (observations of violence, pathological personalities and their evolvement generally shows that they don’t, and arguably, the internet trolls don’t either (link)). What it actually does is forces us to internalise the situation. The act of bullying was real, and it likely influenced us in some way – bullies generally know very well how to hurt others. But ignoring the comments will not rationalise the pain, nor will it solve the problem of it being in a public space (much like bullies often show off their “skills” in front of a playground, school yard or indeed office, banking on lack of reaction from everyone involved, giving them a free reign). For a person, this may lead to mental health problems, retreating from social interactions online and/or offline and ultimately even suicide.
For a business, there will be personal damage (because association plays a big role with especially Millennials) and the damage to the reputation of the business in question to consider, and both can influence success immensely. Not only that – they are often deliberately aimed that way, in part because social causes can and do attract the personalities that abuse them simply to find a safe, seemingly laudable way to lash out.
Nor is “don’t feed the troll” actually necessarily a good solution. Responding with silence to accusations, however outlandish (because outlandish accusations still get believers and supporters and can still tarnish your public image), may simply meant that you will end up portrayed as uncaring, unwilling to communicate or embarrassed by the “truth” that you know you can never deny. If anything, silence empowers the bully beyond imagination.
A good strategy to accusations is to take on a conversationalist approach. Publicly asking the “whistleblower” to provide actual, factual proof for their accusations is a good way to make those who may consider the accusation real but are not sure falter and begin to think. If your sources are scoffed, explain why you rely on them – if they provide a conspiracy theory or site devoted to them as theirs, explain why the theory can’t work.
This same approach goes for being called “stupid” online (or, for that matter, in person). While it is incredibly annoying or even painful to be treated this way, remember that, for all that it is personal, it really isn’t – you, or your brand, are simply chosen by someone to further their own agenda, smear campaign or, for that matter, battle their own insecurities by singling out someone to either blame or torture. This is not about you – it is, in every possible way, about them, and them alone.
One useful strategy, also, is to remember that you do not have to be 100 percent correct on anything to be entitled to defend yourself. Perhaps your company really did have a chapter in its history that you are not proud of. Perhaps you made a bad decision that you have hopefully done your best to fix at some point. Perhaps you have read a bit of information somewhere that is usually trustworthy but had failed, on this occasion, to do their fact check correctly. Newsflash – lack of perfection or making mistakes does not entitle others to be abusive towards you; it does not confirm other statements automatically, whatever they may be; it does not mean that you are always wrong; and it most certainly does not mean that you need to now lie down and let others walk over you.
We are responsible for our actions, and for our mistakes – but that goes for everyone, and bullying, smear campaigns and nastiness of any and every kind do not as such count as commendable actions either. Moreover, they, too, count as things one can and should take responsibility for. And since it’s an in thing right now to behave aggressively and negatively towards others, it would do well for us all to remember that and act accordingly when we meet with a situation that requires an intelligent, measured response.
Remember – three quarters of this is to get attention and rile up emotions, both from potential compatriot online bullies and you, the victim.
And while none of us can switch off emotion at will, it can and does help to develop a good strategy and practice for the eventuality when this strategy may be needed.
So how can you do that?
If you are lucky enough to have never been on the receiving end of hate, study the hate campaigns against others. Ask everyone you know about their experiences. Brainstorm with your team. Hire a social, cultural and/or behavioural expert to help you.
Above all, consider that these acts of hate are real, and that they can happen to anyone, at any time, and can have disastrous consequences for the business in question. Which in part is what at least some bullies aim for.
Don’t let them succeed.