• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Northern's social media policy criticised by Which?

Status
Not open for further replies.

msussams

Member
Joined
26 Sep 2014
Messages
62
‘If you wouldn’t do it in person don’t do it online’

Why should Northern or any other toc put up with the minority’s abuse. If I caused the same nuisance face to face I would have been excorted off the station perhaps by BTP. So if there are people who persistently break a code of conduct, then why shouldn’t they get blocked?
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Bantamzen

Established Member
Joined
4 Dec 2013
Messages
9,680
Location
Baildon, West Yorkshire
Or not give them so much to complain about...

Giving customers / Tweeters something to complain about is not necessarily a prerequisite of social media complaining. Social media is full of people complaining for the sake of it, Twitter is particularly bad for it but local newspaper comment sections seem to be magnets for the Formation Moaning Teams that lurk right across the internet. I suspect if Northern ran 100% to time, with 100% extra capacity, with all trains new or nearly new, with couches for seats, free tea & coffee, and gave people bags of money on every trip there would be some who would complain about the colour of the bags.... ;)

‘If you wouldn’t do it in person don’t do it online’

Why should Northern or any other toc put up with the minority’s abuse. If I caused the same nuisance face to face I would have been excorted off the station perhaps by BTP. So if there are people who persistently break a code of conduct, then why shouldn’t they get blocked?

They shouldn't. As you say if people wouldn't say it to a person's face, they shouldn't do it online. Saying that, some of the abuse I have heard in recent months towards ticket staff, train crews, even cleaning crews is nothing short of disgusting. Some people in this country are sadly of the opinion that the world revolves solely around them, and if anything doesn't meet their expectations and more that they have a right to abuse the first person they come across.
 

AlterEgo

Veteran Member
Joined
30 Dec 2008
Messages
20,038
Location
No longer here
Preventing genuine troublemakers from commenting is one thing. However, denying those people easy access to information about service issues is not acceptable.

(And if it's not possible to do the former without the latter, then maybe they shouldn't be using Twitter to diseminate this information. Regardless, attempting to deny particular individuals access to service update information is unacceptable.)

Blocking someone doesn’t prevent them from commenting about you or to you, it just means the person on the receiving end won’t see it.
 

AlterEgo

Veteran Member
Joined
30 Dec 2008
Messages
20,038
Location
No longer here
We've not blocked anyone just for voicing complaints. Regardless of what people may claim, we would never do that - it's anathema to why the social media team exists. We block for violations of the policies listed previously - usually it has to be multiple violations over a long period of time

I'd also add that muting for us doesn't do anything. We respond to customers through Conversocial rather than through Twitter or Facebook themselves. Muting only stops you seeing the messages in Twitter itself - Conversocial will still pick the messages up regardless. The only way to stop the messages getting through is blocking - though even then, we still have a way of seeing a lot of them, just outside our main feed. In fact, the only way to guarantee that we cannot see those messages is actually be blocked ourselves

Northern shouldn’t be blocking people. That’s tone deaf social media if I’m honest. A blocked person knows they’re blocked and it will wind them up more and cost you more reputational damage in the long run as they ramp up their campaign.

Twitter has a mute button and this is what you need if you don’t want to read someone’s repetitive drivel any more.

Yes the disreputable and dubious policy decisions, and the poor response times are not the fault of the dedicated individual staff members, who do a good job under challenging circumstances, but the appalling management at the company.

I very much doubt they will listen to their staff, members of this forum, editors at Which? or indeed anyone else, sadly. But if the management are reading this... please do prove me wrong and change your ways.

I am also available for a fee. :D
 

Bantamzen

Established Member
Joined
4 Dec 2013
Messages
9,680
Location
Baildon, West Yorkshire
I don't think anyone is saying they should.
The question is what about the tweets that aren't abusive but Northern just don't like?

Tweets don't need to be abusive to fall foul of their rules. Someone constantly interrupting conversations, or some constantly offering contradictory advice might well eventually find themselves blocked. As has been explained, every Tweet has to be read to ensure that there isn't a legitimate query to answer or that a rule of the feed has been broken. So every time a third party chips in, they are taking up time of the agent working the feed. And even though a Tweet can be read in seconds, it doesn't take too many people too long to start to seriously impact on the staff's ability to provide a swift service. That's not only unfair on the TOC, but on those people waiting for an urgent response about their journey.

Of course judging by some of the regular noisy Tweeters on Northern's feed, they don't really care about any of that just so long as they get their moan in constantly, or worse just feed their narcissistic side. Some even seem to think they are some kind of Twitter superstars or heroes when in reality they are just a pain in people's rear ends.
 

WelshBluebird

Established Member
Joined
14 Jan 2010
Messages
4,923
Tweets don't need to be abusive to fall foul of their rules. Someone constantly interrupting conversations, or some constantly offering contradictory advice might well eventually find themselves blocked. As has been explained, every Tweet has to be read to ensure that there isn't a legitimate query to answer or that a rule of the feed has been broken. So every time a third party chips in, they are taking up time of the agent working the feed. And even though a Tweet can be read in seconds, it doesn't take too many people too long to start to seriously impact on the staff's ability to provide a swift service. That's not only unfair on the TOC, but on those people waiting for an urgent response about their journey.

Of course judging by some of the regular noisy Tweeters on Northern's feed, they don't really care about any of that just so long as they get their moan in constantly, or worse just feed their narcissistic side. Some even seem to think they are some kind of Twitter superstars or heroes when in reality they are just a pain in people's rear ends.

So firstly I was specifically replying to msussams point of why should they have to put up with abuse. The answer is they shouldn't have to and anyone actually abusing staff (be it in person or online) should be blocked / arrested / refused travel etc. There is no place for it.

But in reply to the rest of your post, there is a difference though is there not? If someone is replying with rubbish, or giving out false information themselves, then yes, of course block / mute them. But if someone is interjecting because Northern have given out false information and the person is posting a correction, or because they have had the same issue and want to add their voice to the complaint (I don't know, maybe something like a ticket machine that has been out of order for weeks that the ToC hasn't yet fixed) - then I see no problem at all with that.
 

Bantamzen

Established Member
Joined
4 Dec 2013
Messages
9,680
Location
Baildon, West Yorkshire
So firstly I was specifically replying to msussams point of why should they have to put up with abuse. The answer is they shouldn't have to and anyone actually abusing staff (be it in person or online) should be blocked / arrested / refused travel etc. There is no place for it.

And I totally agree.

But in reply to the rest of your post, there is a difference though is there not? If someone is replying with rubbish, or giving out false information themselves, then yes, of course block / mute them. But if someone is interjecting because Northern have given out false information and the person is posting a correction, or because they have had the same issue and want to add their voice to the complaint (I don't know, maybe something like a ticket machine that has been out of order for weeks that the ToC hasn't yet fixed) - then I see no problem at all with that.

Well, firstly we have had no examples that people have been blocked for giving useful advice, so this cannot be verified. But even where someone is genuinely trying to correct a TOC, how do they themselves know for certain that the advice they are giving is correct in every circumstance? There could be occasions where people trying to be helpful are unaware that in that particular instance they are giving out incorrect advice.

The occasional "Oh I'm at the station and the service details have just been announced over the tannoy" type advice is probably tolerated, maybe even welcomed. But whilst social media teams may occasionally make mistakes, people who are constantly chipping in can still end up misleading and confusing people. And moreover, do these people then accept liability for any incorrect information given out? What if someone finds themselves stranded, or facing a penalty / excess fare because of some incorrect or out of date information given out by a well-meaning third party? If Northern get it wrong there is a process to right that (maybe not a perfect one but that's another matter), but Northern cannot be responsible for incorrect information given out by non-staff.

A line has to be drawn somewhere. Some people may not like it, but at the end of the day constant abuse or misuse of such feeds could well see them pulled altogether, or scaled back to read only feeds which will be at the detriment of all. And trust me, as an admin for a number of social media groups a fraction of the size of Northern's, it is a constant battle to balance fairness & control!
 

DarloRich

Veteran Member
Joined
12 Oct 2010
Messages
29,182
Location
Fenny Stratford
i also wonder at TOC's twitter people wasting time answering questions like "Can you tell me where 142895 is today?" - That doesn't really help normal passengers but I suppose it all helps with reputation. Personally I wouldn't entertain such questions as they waste time from dealing with real issues but each to their own.

PS lord know I give LM enough stick on Twitter for the MV line performance but they haven't ever blocked me, thankfully. I am never rude but i wont accept a fobbing.
 

al78

Established Member
Joined
7 Jan 2013
Messages
2,404
They shouldn't. As you say if people wouldn't say it to a person's face, they shouldn't do it online.

Unfortunately, human nature being what it is, it doesn't work like that. Interacting directly with a person face to face is a lot different to interacting with words on a screen. The latter dehumanizes the person at the other end, so it is not classed as the same as direct conversation, it is just words on a screen. In addition, the consequences vanish when communicating online anonymously, there is no-one standing in front of you to smash your face in. It is the same on forums such as this. I suspect that there have been plenty of heated arguments on here with insults flying back and forth that wouldn't happen if those people were standing toe to toe. Think of online dating and ghosting, people do that because they can without consequence, some people when separated from consequence are happy to throw away moral values to reveal their true self.
 

Bwlch y Groes

Member
Joined
22 Jul 2017
Messages
210
Northern shouldn’t be blocking people. That’s tone deaf social media if I’m honest. A blocked person knows they’re blocked and it will wind them up more and cost you more reputational damage in the long run as they ramp up their campaign.

So what? The only way these people could "campaign" against us is by lying. They would get found out eventually. The number of people appalled by a story like this is far outweighed by the number of people who can suss it: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...d-having-account-shut-curry-conversation.html

The fact is it's a staff welfare issue above all else - we should be allowed to refuse to serve people who are abusive or disruptive, in the same way that pubs and restaurants are allowed to refuse to serve people for the same reason, or call centre advisors are allowed to hang up on someone. The people we have blocked who haven't been abusive have been blocked for taking up our time which we would be using to provide assistance to the customers who genuinely need it. Why should the fact that it's online over messages rather than spoken word make this any different to what customer service people can do when face-to-face with customers or dealing with them over the phone? Why should social media advisors have to be extra resilient?
 
Last edited:

Xenophon PCDGS

Veteran Member
Joined
17 Apr 2011
Messages
32,270
Location
A semi-rural part of north-west England
The fact is it's a staff welfare issue above all else - we should be allowed to refuse to serve people who are abusive or disruptive, in the same way that pubs and restaurants are allowed to refuse to serve people for the same reason, or call centre advisors are allowed to hang up on someone. Why should social media advisors have to be extra resilient?

A point well made that draws comparisons to other areas where the public are involved.
 

87015

Established Member
Joined
3 Mar 2006
Messages
4,901
Location
GEML/WCML/SR
See they are busy tweeting PR nonsense this afternoon whilst the service is in meltdown with predictable response of entirely getting people’s backs up and bringing the industry further down.

#clueless
 

Tetchytyke

Veteran Member
Joined
12 Sep 2013
Messages
13,305
Location
Isle of Man
The fact is it's a staff welfare issue above all else - we should be allowed to refuse to serve people who are abusive or disruptive, in the same way that pubs and restaurants are allowed to refuse to serve people for the same reason, or call centre advisors are allowed to hang up on someone.

That's what the mute button is for. They can see you but you can't see them. They're just swearing into the ether, not knowing you're not listening.

Blocking them tells them they're blocked, which is needlessly provocative and is only going to inflame things.

I've also seem one TOC's Twitter staff complain about swearing they weren't actually tagged in. They saw it by searching the hashtag. That's just doubly inflammatory.
 

KatCommuter

New Member
Joined
30 May 2018
Messages
2
So if a commuter is delayed by an hour every morning and an hour every evening, for weeks, and makes a point of complaining about that, and a point of adding their voice to others' complaints in order to amplify them and drive them up to the "top posts" section, they should be blocked?

I work in communications, and have done for a long time, and I can tell you now that if any of my team (and I've had teams working in extremely high pressure situations) blocked even a serial complainer, they would be in trouble. The volume of complaints is a yardstick of your service, and frankly it seems Northern just want to ignore their customers because they can't solve the underlying problem.

And as for the member of Northern's social team on here accusing customers of lying...
 

AlterEgo

Veteran Member
Joined
30 Dec 2008
Messages
20,038
Location
No longer here
So what? The only way these people can "campaign" against is by lying. They will get found out eventually. The number of people appalled by a story like this is far outweighed by the number of people who can suss it: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...d-having-account-shut-curry-conversation.html

I don’t know what you mean by “so what”, when the direct consequences of blocking people have garnered Northern a negative news story.

The fact is it's a staff welfare issue above all else - we should be allowed to refuse to serve people who are abusive or disruptive, in the same way that pubs and restaurants are allowed to refuse to serve people for the same reason, or call centre advisors are allowed to hang up on someone.

I agree you should refuse to engage with people who are actually abusive. Nobody on this thread is in any doubt about that.

The people we have blocked who haven't been abusive have been blocked for taking up our time which we would be using to provide assistance to the customers who genuinely need it.

Get your social media team to learn how to use a mute button. It’s less passive-aggressive and I’m not sure you or many other people on the thread grasp that.

Got a problem with a sad knob head who doesn’t shut up and hates the company? Can’t help them any more? Tweeting you every day? That’s what the mute button is actually for.

Why should the fact that it's online over messages rather than spoken word make this any different to what customer service people can do when face-to-face with customers or dealing with them over the phone? Why should social media advisors have to be extra resilient?

Social media advisors don’t have to be more resilient than frontline staff dealing with customers face to face. Social media staff are far away from any angry customer and there is no threat of violence.

I’ve done the job for two intercity TOCs and it is only as hard as you want to make it.

Just ignore people who are annoying. Mute them. They'll never know, they’ll just know you don’t reply.
 

Bwlch y Groes

Member
Joined
22 Jul 2017
Messages
210
As said previously, the software that we use does not allow us to mute accounts - and our policy is very clear on this. So why should we have to put up with people wilfully disrupting our job, which is to help customers?
 

AlterEgo

Veteran Member
Joined
30 Dec 2008
Messages
20,038
Location
No longer here
As said previously, the software that we use does not allow us to mute accounts - and our policy is very clear on this. So why should we have to put up with people wilfully disrupting our job, which is to help customers?

If you’re still using Conversocial, yes it does have a mute function. It’s very easy to filter out people and words you don’t want to hear from. The off-the-shelf version does this.
 

Bwlch y Groes

Member
Joined
22 Jul 2017
Messages
210
If you’re still using Conversocial, yes it does have a mute function. It’s very easy to filter out people and words you don’t want to hear from. The off-the-shelf version does this.

With the proactive searches we have set up, it makes no difference. Ultimately we collect the messages anyway for providing feedback to the rest of the organisation. And our social media policy is very clear that if you break the rules for engagement with us, we are within our rights to block, rather than mute
 

AlterEgo

Veteran Member
Joined
30 Dec 2008
Messages
20,038
Location
No longer here
With the proactive searches we have set up, it makes no difference. Ultimately we collect the messages anyway for providing feedback to the rest of the organisation. And our social media policy is very clear that if you break the rules for engagement with us, we are within our rights to block, rather than mute

It doesn’t matter what the policy is, it’s not a helpful one, as evidenced by the fact you now have a news story about it.

Northern are not a company with a strong brand or a positive perception among consumers. Season ticket prices are on the rise. Performance is poor. Rail in general is having big problems with public perception thanks to a multitude of issues, not least the new timetable farce. Therefore nobody is going to stick up for you. I don’t understand why you would block people who are repeatedly irritating (but not abusive or out of order) when this is an inflammatory action. If you can’t mute them, just clear their tweets in the software. I’ve done the job.

If you’re unable to use the filtering software to sift out people you don’t want to hear from, you should speak to your account manager, as this is definitely possible with Conversocial - I have used it before.
 

fowler9

Established Member
Joined
29 Oct 2013
Messages
8,367
Location
Liverpool
There is a very small but very vocal subset of the population who are obessive complainers regardless of justification. Everybody who works in a customer facing role will encounter them at some point in their lives. When you had to write a letter, buy stamps, and walk to a postbox every time they were usually just an amusing distraction but I hate to think what some of the weirdos that I had to be polite to in my younger days would be like with social media.
Very much this. When I started dealing with complaints some twenty years ago it was all written on paper. I had one genuine crank that wrote in several times, to be fair his letters were funny. These days you have people messaging in using Facebook, Twitter and other methods several times a day who clearly live in a fantasy realm but everyone can see what they say and they tend to believe the crank over "The Man". It is a nightmare.
 

Loop & Link

Member
Joined
22 Feb 2015
Messages
515
It doesn’t matter what the policy is, it’s not a helpful one, as evidenced by the fact you now have a news story about it.

Northern are not a company with a strong brand or a positive perception among consumers. Season ticket prices are on the rise. Performance is poor. Rail in general is having big problems with public perception thanks to a multitude of issues, not least the new timetable farce. Therefore nobody is going to stick up for you. I don’t understand why you would block people who are repeatedly irritating (but not abusive or out of order) when this is an inflammatory action. If you can’t mute them, just clear their tweets in the software. I’ve done the job.

If you’re unable to use the filtering software to sift out people you don’t want to hear from, you should speak to your account manager, as this is definitely possible with Conversocial - I have used it before.

Instead of having a go at the staff, that are just following policy, get in touch with the Communications/Marketing department and make your feelings known, as you’ve said you’ve done the job yourself, don’t take it out on the poor staff manning it, take those higher up to task, and explain the need for change.
 

AlterEgo

Veteran Member
Joined
30 Dec 2008
Messages
20,038
Location
No longer here
Instead of having a go at the staff, that are just following policy, get in touch with the Communications/Marketing department and make your feelings known, as you’ve said you’ve done the job yourself, don’t take it out on the poor staff manning it, take those higher up to task, and explain the need for change.

I’m not having a go at the staff, I’m responding to a poster who is claiming this is the correct way to operate a social media account. I disagree.

The poster isn’t saying “look I don’t agree and I don’t make the rules”, they’re actively defending the policy.
 

Jimmy Foster

Member
Joined
18 May 2018
Messages
19
As said previously, the software that we use does not allow us to mute accounts - and our policy is very clear on this. So why should we have to put up with people wilfully disrupting our job, which is to help customers?

Completely agree with this - some of the abuse that northernassist and their managers get is beyond disgusting which must make their job extremely unpleasant. I don't see much disagreement with the Northern approach of blocking abusive people but I also support their right to do their job without being hassled by people making the same comment over and over again or tagging them in every single complaining tweet because that reduces their capacity to help people who are genuinely looking for and need some help, which I am sure is the majority of people.
 

KatCommuter

New Member
Joined
30 May 2018
Messages
2
I’m not having a go at the staff, I’m responding to a poster who is claiming this is the correct way to operate a social media account. I disagree.

The poster isn’t saying “look I don’t agree and I don’t make the rules”, they’re actively defending the policy.

Yep, and this is exactly the problem. Northern's entire comms strategy is deeply flawed - they're slow to react, tone-deaf, always on the back foot and definitely should have brought in a specialist agency to help them by this point as they've been in what is essentially a crisis comms situation for the last 3-6 weeks. They also refuse to answer customers' questions properly, essentially just repeating back at them information that's already available on he app but using different words. It's not like they're answering tweets on their phones - they're using specialist decks which means it takes milliseconds to scan through messages that don't need replying to and assign ones that do to a team member. Comms is the one thing we know Northern definitely have complete control over, and they've screwed it up - it's a case study in what not to do in this situation.
 

Bantamzen

Established Member
Joined
4 Dec 2013
Messages
9,680
Location
Baildon, West Yorkshire
I'm just waiting for someone to pipe up and say Northern's social media policy is a breach of some consumer law or human rights..... :|

As someone who has worked alongside my employer's social media team for a public sector body that is even less popular than Northern, I can only say that the job is nothing short of a nightmare. Generally speaking social media feeds are used to publish information & to answer general queries. They are not forums like this for people to continually express their outrage at whatever the day's outrage is, nor is it a medium to spread malcontent because someone has an axe to grind. But this is exactly what I see with monotonous regularity. Often a thread starts out as "Why is the xx:xx to Victoria late", then when the Twitter team respond with something like "Sorry but there is a crew shortage" it can then often descend into "Blummin' Typical" & "Northern are a disgrace" & "I hate Northern" none of which helps to inform or resolve.

And there are the predicable regulars who pop up time & again with exactly the same rants, the same insults & abuse. I've seen this in my work, on Northen's feeds & indeed right across the net. Contrary to what some members think here, simply muting or ignoring some posters isn't an option. When you run any kind of social media group, especially something like Twitter where single posts can go from a few views to trending, you have to keep an eye on every post to ensure that things aren't getting out of hand. The media does monitor trending feeds with a view to a quick story, so some rumour or incorrect piece of information can quickly get out of control and before you know it the story is all over online & printed media.

My employer's feed has a very similar policy to Northern, keep on abusing, threatening or disrupting threads and out you go. No 'ifs', no 'but's just off you go. And I suspect the same will be true across many company and departmental feeds. The other option would be if things got too difficult to manage to simply to pull the feeds altogether, as Whetherspoons have recently done. Its not really a major deal with a public house chain, but if TOCs pulled theirs a valuable resource would be lost because some people are simply addicted to messing things up for others.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top