I am disheartened by the news that Charles Dunstone has stopped his Blog on the Carphone Warehouse site:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/02/01/dunstone_blog_deleted/
Does this not send out some very clear messages?
1. That its ok to pull the Cheif Exec's blog off the corporate site without warning
2. That its ok for him to gradually reduce his blogging activity as the customer service of his product reduces
3. That CW believes that the removed blog somehow causes less reputational damage than the Cheif Exec's apologies remaining online (for existing and future customers to see)
Perhaps he said something that contravened the Data Protection Act
5 comments:
Actually, the blog has been removed due to a site redesign and a new TalkTalk members forum has been created at: http://www.talktalkmembers.com/ this is in light of the poor Customer reputation of TalkTalk over the last 12 months.
This forum gives TalkTalk users and anyone else who would like to view their comments the ability to really understand what TalkTalk users think of the service and also what problems they may have (and obviously how to resolve them).
This is real transparancy and offers something more that a Blog can or will ever do, the comments of real Customers both good and bad are there for the whole world to see, this is obviously better than a blog that is controlled within a corporate environment that is PR/Sales driven.
Operating an Internet company is one huge task, and as technology advances I am very impressed with this radical transparancy. Are any other companies prepared to air their washing in public?
David
You speak with some authority on the subject, so thanks for your response. However there are some pretty fundamental issues which your email either doesn’t tackle or raises further:
1.
Removing the Chief Exec’s blog during a redesign of the site is either a planned initiative with stakeholder involvement or a shocking oversight.
Note: the URL it used to be
2.
The TalkTalkMembers site, whilst a worthy attempt to provide transparency of issues and to provide a means for the technical support teams to give updates on current issues, is not the Chief Exec’s blog and caters for an entirely different audience.
Charles Dunstone, when he started blogging publicly stated he would “update this blog regularly to keep you up to date with what's happening". He has even come under scrutiny for not updating his blog over a year ago, so this is not a new occurrence.
Blaming the company’s size is an excuse and therefore shows that it has potentially not dealt adequately with the economies of scale that has followed its previous acquisitions.
I therefore feel my comments are entirely valid and hardly the humility and human qualities we would expect from a modern company boss.
I’m personally looking forward to The Telegraph’s comments when they hear of this, given the ribbing they gave him when he stopped blogging for a while at the end of 2006.
David, I don't think the forum offers "more" than a blog per se, but it does offer something different, and it has a lot of potential. I would assume you're one of the moderators on the TalkTalkMembers site? If so good luck with it.
Regarding the blog, "removed due to a site design" isn't what the spokesperson for TCW said (allegedly). And is it safe to say the TCW forum moderators are bound by the same rules and corporate environment that the blog was? After all, if your CEO can't say something, how can you be allowed to?
This is very interesting and entirely in line with my perception of Mr Dunstone. One minor point, your comment, point 2, mentions the Telegraph but your link is to the Guardian....?
Camilla
Thanks for your comment.
As for the newspaper link, it is correct, I just got the newpaper wrong (it seems I don't know my left from my right...)
Hayden
Post a Comment