Public Quarrel – Share Go Ola, goodbye. But the nonsense is big

Tweet win: Big headline!

It started with a tweet. You responded. While the engagement generated by public brawls may be attractive to some, there is a distinct lack of accountability in these interactions. Especially if it’s boring. Some people believe they are immune to criticism and can respond in ways that reflect the need to control the narrative. Defense and confrontation take precedence over accountability and transparency.

This dynamic is a key issue in today’s social media landscape: the tendency to prioritize personal positions over meaningful, solution-oriented conversations. A simple response is

Ola Electric stock falls: Not a pleasant ride

In other news today, Ola Electric shares fell below Rs 90. to 89.55 rupees, a decrease of 8.38%. FADA reported that Ola Electric sales in September 2024 were 24,679 units.

While common, certain arguments are a problematic dynamic in public discourse, especially on social media. Especially when a confrontational tone and personal attacks often overshadow constructive dialogue. Why is this phenomenon so common?

Social Media: Where Politeness Dies

When a company or person is publicly criticized, the tweet will most likely be ignored or there will be an automated bot reply explaining how they will investigate the issue and a customer service person will contact them. But this pattern may change if the tweet comes from a known/popular entity. There could be great drama if you weren’t nameless/nameless. The urge to defend oneself in the face of public criticism may be innate. As a result, people can deflect criticism through personal attacks rather than having even a modicum of meaningful dialogue. This behavior may be a result of feeling personally attacked, even if the criticism is directed at the company rather than the individual. At the same time, a large number of viewers were also attracted.

Is it difficult for a CEO or company leader to separate themselves from their company because their identities are often so deeply intertwined with the brands they represent? Does criticism of the company feel like a direct attack on their personal abilities, leadership, or vision? Is negative feedback necessary to protect not just the company’s reputation, but their own?

Brand Reputation Management – Choose Silence

On platforms like Twitter, communications tend to escalate quickly as scrutiny and audience participation create an environment filled with drama. Aggressive reactions tend to gain traction. This is participatory farming without even trying. When public figures engage in public spats, especially on social media, it attracts attention, increases engagement and fosters conversation, even if the content itself is derogatory. A spectacle. Such responses, no matter how unprofessional or personal, can trigger a backlash, whether it’s support from loyalists or anger from critics, which in turn increases visibility and keeps the brand in the public eye. The more attention a person attracts, the more “buzz” is generated, whether positive or negative.

The Code of Conduct outlines expected standards of behavior in accordance with the company’s values ​​and ethical standards. The easier thing to do is to “Let It Be,” as the Beatles sang, and then choose not to reply to the tweet, as many have done countless times.