Responding to critics — is it risky to fight a misleading reviewer?

“Ignore them and they’ll go away.” That’s certainly the conventional wisdom; the view in the hospitality industry that responding to misleading, even hostile, criticism just empowers the critic. Especially when, in this ever-evolving age of social media, the critic might merely be an influencer seeking fame, but happy to settle for (easier-to-achieve) infamy.

But what of the critic’s community; their followers who might actually follow them away from your establishment? They probably know neither the truth nor the context of the dining experience being criticised, nor — very occasionally — the critic’s undeclared agenda in targeting you.

And then there’s the wider community. Should they be left to rely solely on the critic’s unfounded — and, unless you respond, unchallenged — claims?

I welcome feedback, both good and bad, and I’m pleased to say that feedback to my three Goodness Gracious cafes is overwhelmingly positive. If it’s negative, and if I can tell it’s genuine and the customer has good reason to be disappointed, I’m very happy to apologise and to have the opportunity to tweak our service appropriately.

But I’ve had one experience of being targeted by someone who turned a single visit to one of my cafes into what was a serious attempt to harm my business. And I didn’t ignore him; I made a calculated decision to ignore the conventional wisdom. I took a risk. I fed the fire. I purposefully fought back.

I deliberately engaged in what most would regard as an unconventional manner. I knew that by responding I would publicise the person’s criticisms across social media and possibly mainstream media (which it subsequently did). I knew it would give the criticisms more exposure — but it would also give me a chance to refute them and to provide sufficient context to allow readers to understand the critic’s motives. I knew I had little hope of winning over the critic’s faithful followers, but I wanted them to know the truth anyway.

More importantly I was especially keen for the ‘Goodness Gracious community’ — our many regulars and supporters — to know I was prepared to stand up against unfounded hostility.

Because this became a very public spat, I’ve often been asked how it affected our business, and whether or not I’d do it again. My answer: I might, but it will always depend on the specific context. Publicising the spat immediately boosted our brand recognition and exposure, and my strong defence of the brand galvanised our staff. Both benefits have endured.

The simple fact that we chose to fight back was criticised by some people, but the publicity seemed to attract many more. Our Goodness Gracious community was strengthened in both numbers and loyalty. Our brand stood out even more than before.

Rather than damaging the Goodness Gracious business, it appears our willingness to stand strong enticed — and continues to entice — new customers who want to see for themselves what the fuss was all about!

Originally published at https://www.linkedin.com.