Lufthansa abandons AirTag ban • Hacker News Board

Re: Lufthansa abandons AirTag ban

#111

Post by jbverschoor » Sat, Oct 15, 2022, 5:01 AM UTC

InTheArena wrote: post #7

Classic. Someone gets a lower-level customer service rep on twitter to make a statement based on incorrect and incomplete information about Airtags in compliance with regulation. Media blows it up into this insane thing, that Lufthansa is evil, and doesn't want you to track your bags, so they can lose it with no repercussions. Lufthansa clarifies things (once again, in line with law) - and then the media uses works l…

You really believe that it’s because of a single rep? Then you also might also believe that most management disasters are “programming errors” like that sometimes say?

Re: Lufthansa abandons AirTag ban

#112

Post by arinlen » Sat, Oct 15, 2022, 5:40 AM UTC

INTPenis wrote: post #62

nmilo wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then maybe it's time that lower-level customer service reps stop running official company twitter accounts. Maybe you and I see it differently, but most of the world sees a company's twitter account as the official source of information and fast-paced updates. It has as much significance as a press release from the CEO or an announcement on the company website. So if the lower-level customer service rep fucks up, out…

You're going after the wrong people here. Journalists hungry for clickbait can't wait for incompetent customer reps to tweet some stupid shit. So the "journalist" can blow it out of proportion. It's literally their bread and butter.

> You're going after the wrong people here. Journalists hungry for clickbait can't wait for incompetent customer reps to tweet some stupid shit. So the "journalist" can blow it out of proportion. It's literally their bread and butter.

You're quick to spread around accusations of incompetence and dishonesty.

Is it too hard to think that a corporation's main PR communication channel actually reflects the company's official PR policy, and that their backpedalling is really the company changing it's public message to reflect a change of heart in a company policy?

Re: Lufthansa abandons AirTag ban

#113

Post by arinlen » Sat, Oct 15, 2022, 5:48 AM UTC

jbverschoor wrote: post #111

InTheArena wrote: post #7

Classic. Someone gets a lower-level customer service rep on twitter to make a statement based on incorrect and incomplete information about Airtags in compliance with regulation. Media blows it up into this insane thing, that Lufthansa is evil, and doesn't want you to track your bags, so they can lose it with no repercussions. Lufthansa clarifies things (once again, in line with law) - and then the media uses works l…

You really believe that it’s because of a single rep? Then you also might also believe that most management disasters are “programming errors” like that sometimes say?

> You really believe that it’s because of a single rep? Then you also might also believe that most management disasters are “programming errors” like that sometimes say?

It's uncanny how all of the world's problems are either caused by lower-end employees or acts of god.

The higher the position, the more infallible they are.

That must be why higher-uos are paid the most: they are physically unable to do no wrong.

Re: Lufthansa abandons AirTag ban

#114

Post by danpalmer » Mon, Oct 17, 2022, 5:45 PM UTC

prange wrote: post #103

danpalmer wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fact that Twitter is a customer service channel, the tweet was sent with "Qualtrics Social Connect" which describes itself as a customer service tool, the fact that there was a personal sign-off on the tweet which big companies don't tend to do when they're making policy announcements, but that they do tend to do when a customer service rep is replying to a customer question. Plenty of large companies do this sor…

> the fact that Twitter is a customer service channel This is circular reasoning. Nowhere is it established that Twitter is a customer service channel. Other parts of your in your first paragraph makes sense, but are also non-obvious and reflect expertise and evidence collecting on your part. Plenty of large companies do also use Twitter for PR rather than customer service. Unless clearly stated otherwise, there is n…

It sounds like you are coming from the position of "prove to me Twitter does customer support", and you're right I went and gathered some evidence for this. If you started from that position though I think you're entirely justified in not realising this was a customer support interaction.

However, in my experience of ~14 years on Twitter, seeing support processes inside companies, and as a consumer, I think most consumers treat any two-way comms channel from a company as customer support regardless of whether the company is providing it. Many even treat review websites as customer support, despite it being wholly inappropriate for that.

Companies do support on Twitter because their customers are treating it like that, not the other way around.

Re: Lufthansa abandons AirTag ban

#115

Post by danpalmer » Mon, Oct 17, 2022, 5:49 PM UTC

duxup wrote: post #81

danpalmer wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fact that Twitter is a customer service channel, the tweet was sent with "Qualtrics Social Connect" which describes itself as a customer service tool, the fact that there was a personal sign-off on the tweet which big companies don't tend to do when they're making policy announcements, but that they do tend to do when a customer service rep is replying to a customer question. Plenty of large companies do this sor…

Not to disagree with your characterization of the tweet or response to the user, but what's the end point then? "Don't believe our official twitter account if you think customer service is involved?" I have trouble faulting anyone for believing what was a very clear statement on their official twitter account.

There's a difference between the Lufthansa account tweeting out a statement, and a Lufthansa rep, named in the tweet, replying to one user. The reply means that it's hidden from anyone who isn't either following both users (unlikely) or actively seeking it out.

I see this interaction as closer to a customer service phone call where a rep got something wrong, and the only fallout should be that I as one single customer am now misinformed. The amount of checks and balances to ensure that messaging is correct doesn't need too high as it's low risk if one customer is misinformed. Whereas if Lufthansa makes a full statement they should expect all customers to be misinformed, or expect the press to pick it up.

This brings me back to my original point. I don't think the press reported on this well, because this was clearly not an official statement prepared for the press or the audience of all customers, with the level of thinking about it that should go into that sort of thing. It was clearly (to me) an isolated thing. The correct course of action for a journalist would be to confirm with Lufthansa, which appears not to have happened.