I think Southwest is missing an opportunity to effectively come clean on this recent story that they let 46 of the planes fly beyond the FAA mandated amount of per plane flights to have an inspection. They’re using “spinspeak” when they don’t have to.

The issue is muddled. The level of responsiblity is unclear. The nexus of blame looks to be dispersed. Southwest needs to open up a bit more. Instead, they obfuscate.

“The FAA has issued what is called a “letter of penalty” to Southwest Airlines regarding one of many routine, redundant, and overlapping inspections of our fleet. The specific inspection in question involves an extremely small area in one of many overlapping inspections designed to detect early signs of skin cracking on our aircraft.”

“Many, routine, redundant, and overlapping inspections”…”extremely small area in one of manyh ovrlapping inspections”. Please.

Meanitme, one can simply read any news coverge of this and find out that the airline went well past the alloted amount of flights. By trying to sound “reasonable”, they cause people to look elsewhere. And the term “overlapping inspections”…what they hell does that mean?

Most of the rest of what they say if fine. But in the interest of transparency, simply explain the concept of inspections based upon amount of flights. THEN you add how you found the problem and quickly notified the authorities. Keep the bulk of the story on the blog itself. Off an apology for the confusion. Thank people for their loyalty. Let them know that you’ll keep them informed via the blog. Have CEO Gary Kelly post an entry a week until the situation resolves itself.

Right now there’s a bunch of responsed showing doubt towards Southwest. And there’s a significant amount of supportive responses. Some very elaborate. Allmost seems organized, but they’re not cookie cutter. And y0u’ve got some who are defending the company by attacking the media. Saying that the media doesn’t know what they’re talking about…that the media is blowing things out of proportion. On what they’re basing this I don’t know.

Southwest has 30 days to respond to the FAA’s letter of inquiry. Let’s see how it turns out.

Much like Search Moptimization, we catagorize “Wombagging” as Defensive SEO.

‘”Wombagging”: This exercise tries to protect, or sandbag, your brand from negative or undesirable word of mouth (WOM). This could include anything everything from buying negative keywords on search engines to putting videos on your Web site featuring your CEO begging for patience and forgiveness. For some companies, wombagging might even include employing staffers in defense of bad buzz. But again, all this falls into the defensive branding arena, not outright promotion.’ The Official 2008 Web 2.0 Buzzword Forecast By Pete Blackshaw

However, we at Abraham Harrison actually call the process online brand reputation defense, Internet land grab, domain name registration strategy, search engine brand protection, domain name strategy, and domain name protection — they’re all sort of part of completely owning your own space on Google, Yahoo!, and Live.com proactively, well in advance of anything going wrong.

Why? Well, if you own your first three pages of Google well in advance of an online brand perception crisis, there is a much reduced chance of some negative online buzz being able to shoot right up to the top-five results of Google. It is much easier to fortify your castle than it is to rebuild it. Wisdom, free of charge. Tip of the hat to Jonathan Trenn, via ClickZ

Penny Crosman wrote a pretty good review of a book I hadn’t heard of,  Web Dragons, by Ian H. Witten, Marco Gori and Teresa Numerico, which seems like a pretty :

‘How do search engines work? Howare PageRanks calculated? WebDragons, by Ian H. Witten, Marco Gori and Teresa Numerico, takes a textbook approach to such questions using historical analogies. “In Oriental folklore, dragons not only enjoy awesome grace and beauty, they are endowed with immense wisdom,” the authors note. “But in the West, they are often portrayed as evil — St. George vanquishes a fearsome dragon.” Search engines, too, are large beasts and have the capacity for wisdom, good and evil.”In addition to celebrating the joy of being able to find stuff on the Web, we want to make you feel uneasy about how everyone has come to rely on search engines so utterly and completely.”‘ –Penny Crosman of Intelligent Enterprise

This morning I read two important posts written by Greg Sterling on his blog Screenwerk. One is Nielsen - WebVisible Data on Local Search. The other is New Findings on SMBs and User Reviews. It left me more and more convinced how local businesses must view the internet as a marketing and business development source, and as a customer relations and reputation management tool.

Read more…

Check out the article in last Thursday’s Times, Dealing With the Damage From Online Critics, that addresses how to handle consumers who develop a personal vendetta against your company. Well, you could send lawyers but legal cease-and-desists generally just make the customer madder than hell and it isn’t hard to just start yet another attack site.

I hate to say it, sucking less always helps. Start with treating your customers better. Also, be sure to register lots of domain names and work on your online reputation aggressively before it becomes a problem.

Online, the best defense is a good offense and an ounce of online promotion is worth a pound of cure. Here are some great commented-by-me excerpts from the article, Dealing With the Damage From Online Critics, so you can get a gist:

Read more…