> It does confuse me that these mobs have such power on decision makers at companies and media outlets like this. The interesting thing about Twitter "mobs" is that if you look away from the computer screen or hit the button on the side of your phone, they are suddenly silent and may as well not exist.
If you are a company then bad stories on Twitter could cause a significant drop in business. So if you just choose to ignore Twitter, that does not mean that it may as well not exist.
> If you are a company then bad stories on Twitter could cause a significant drop in business.
But does it cause a drop seems like the pertinent question. New media isn't like the old media where bad press was big deal. Maybe it's just not anymore for exactly these reasons.
The angry vocal minority on twitter (people who may not even be customers, perhaps likely are not) really has such an effect on a company's sales? Got any examples?
For Gibsons it wasn't just Twitter complaints. People literally picketed their store (and Oberlin admin managed and helped the protests) and Oberlin itself cut off orders from them - it was direct financial pressure. Surely when a large college that a bakery served for decades suddenly decides to cut off all orders it can hurt much more than a bunch of people putting words into a website.
I think part of the problem is that it's just as likely to cause a raise (from the increased exposure) as it is to cause a drop, which creates an incentive to do things that will incite outrage.
If you are a company then bad stories on Twitter could cause a significant drop in business. So if you just choose to ignore Twitter, that does not mean that it may as well not exist.