Luo Yonghao, a well-known public figure, recently posted a negative review of the ice cream brand Mr. Wild on social media, criticizing its taste and pricing. Unlike previous instances where brands engaged in public disputes, Mr. Wild chose a strategy of silence, only acknowledging that feedback would be reported to management.
This approach contrasts sharply with a historical case involving Xibei, which publicly challenged Luo's negative review years ago. That confrontation led to a public relations crisis, damaging the brand's reputation and serving as a cautionary tale for the industry regarding how to handle consumer feedback.
Following Mr. Wild's decision to remain silent, the hashtag regarding its 'cold treatment' of the situation trended on Weibo. The brand's short-video account subsequently gained tens of thousands of new followers, demonstrating that avoiding direct confrontation can sometimes prevent negative sentiment from escalating.
Experts note that such 'cold treatment' strategies are effective only for subjective consumer complaints, such as taste preferences or pricing, provided no legal or safety violations are involved. In cases involving food safety or false advertising, silence is considered inappropriate and risky.
The core lesson for consumer brands is that public opinion often favors the customer. Attempting to win an online debate by refuting subjective experiences can alienate the public, whereas respecting a consumer's right to express an opinion helps maintain brand trust.
