Hello, I'm back!
This week the Boston Globe ran a piece on a local restaurant that had been essentially charged with defrauding the public because the prices on its website had not been updated to match the prices actually being charged for takeout food. The complaint, over $4, was made by a very established consultant, Ben Edelman,who is known for his advocacy in "cleaning up" the Internet (actually, to put a fine point on it, the Web).
The article is long and not the point, but here it is if you care to read it.
As seems to happen more and more, this blew up and became one of the trending topics of the day in Boston (and apparently elsewhere, as we shall see). One of the more interesting articles about it suggests that "The irony here, of course, is that Edelman’s work is all about protecting online consumers — the little guy — from big businesses. He’s taken Google to task
for continuing to track users who have disabled the search behemoth’s
browser toolbar; he’s fought against spyware; he’s battled Facebook’s
efforts to reveal user data to advertisers. In some ways, his e-mail
battle with Duan is of a piece with his other work: 'Your restaurant
overcharged all customers who viewed the website and placed a telephone
order — the standard way to order takeout,' he wrote at one point.
Replace 'restaurant' with another type of business — or, heck, even an
online food-delivery service like Foodler or Seamless — and this
exchange could be straight out of his professional e-mail archives. He’s
the consumer; he’s, in a sense, the little guy. But because of cultural
attitudes about his credentials, on top of the meticulously detailed
ways he pointed out Duan and Sichuan Garden’s wrongdoing because of what
was ultimately a small sum, Edelman comes off as anything but."
Edelman, who also happens to be a Harvard professor, has apologized.
In the meantime the restaurant has, by management's report, received messages of support from as far away as Australia. They have also issued a statement. Notice how the writer extends thanks for all the support, and how he writes that he has been trying to respond personally to everyone (nice). Notice how he has declined all the offers of website and legal support, because the restaurant can afford these things if needed (very nice). Notice how the writer apologizes to Harvard for their having been inadvertently dragged into the fray (extremely thoughtful). And notice how he exhorts the public to continue to support not just him, but all small businesses trying to serve customers and make a living (extremely gracious).
There is much to be learned here (for example, NEVER assume that your emails are private), but one of the things that stands out, and may not be addressed elsewhere, is that the small business owner empowered himself by presenting not a victim, not a company that takes advantage (at least to this point), but a truly classy establishment that cares about its customers, acknowledges mistakes, and wants and expects to do the right thing. A likely outcome, of course, is that the restaurant will attract plenty of new customers.
And that is a fine beginning on the way to winning friends and influencing customers and prospects.
