How to lose rides & alienate people: Uber versus Lyft

Screenshot taken from Uber's official Twitter account

Social media has become an extension of our lives. The world is at our fingertips 24/7, whether it’s to find out which Disney princess you are (you’re welcome)* or to get emotional about politics, or, if you’re me, both. When a certain someone’s “travel ban” went into effect January 2017, thousands turned to Twitter to protest (#NoBanNoWall). Notably, New York’s City’s cab drivers went on strike in solidarity. And Uber … turned off surge pricing? 

Shortly after, #DeleteUber went viral, as users reacted to the company’s attempt to make a profit during a time of public crisis.

When it rains (#DeleteUber), it pours (#DownloadLyft)

Uber’s then-CEO Travis Kalanick’s (non) apology surprisingly didn’t help; the public wasn’t convinced by Kalanick’s ‘if you can’t beat them, join them’ approach. Uber dropped the ball, that doesn’t have to be insurmountable. But there’s dropping the ball and then there’s scoring an own goal. At the risk of being divisive, with all commercial and reputational consequences thereof, Lyft’s co-founders penned an empathic response to the ban that resonated with the public. Uber’s failure to read the room at a critical time paved the way for competitor Lyft to come out on top in the court of public opinion. 

Screenshot taken from user @EliBraden

From public crisis to corporate crisis

Let’s take Uber’s tweet out of context for a moment. No surge pricing = cheaper fares = good, no? Maybe, if not for timing and momentum. Flipping the focus of an issue onto yourself rather than the matter at hand is a special feat that has been under-researched. However, we come close to understanding this case when looking at a recent study on crisis interpretation as a result of source information.

While Van der Meer’s [1] study focuses on sources (in)directly related to the crisis, Uber came out of left field and created its own crisis. Though unrelated to the ban, the immediate, widespread outrage towards Uber is exactly what Van der Meer talks about. Particularly, rapid development and diffusion of online communication technologies have changed the nature of mediated communication and, consequently, public response to crises.

Unanticipated publicity 

This is further explained by the emotion-cognition dual-factor model of crisis communication [2] The model demonstrates that the relationship between crisis information processing and crisis emotions is influenced by framing effects and online emotional contagion. Another study finds that negative crisis emotions in particular incite online emotional contagion; specifically, indignation increases the likelihood of online word-of-mouth [3]. Thus, when the public constructs a negative frame around a crisis, they are more likely to propagate their opinions in online spaces, adding fuel to the fire. This explains Uber’s unanticipated online publicity, and illustrates why the effect of crisis emotions is an important factor for crisis communication 

There is no pleasing everyone, so that’s not something we can blame Uber for — personal politics aside. The biggest issue here? Uber focused on damage control, where Lyft recognised customers’ concerns. Public relations professionals need to better understand the “terrain around motivations, values and emotions,” [4] how this influences attitudes and behaviour, and, subsequently, reputation management.

* I’m Cinderella, in case you were wondering.

            

[1] Van der Meer, T. G. (2016). Public frame building: The role of source usage in times of crisis. Communication Research, 45(6), 956-981.

[2] Lu, Y., & Huang, Y. H. C. (2018). Getting emotional: An emotion-cognition dual-factor model of crisis communication. Public Relations Review, 44(1), 98-107.

[3] Roh, S. (2017). Examining the paracrisis online: The effects of message source, response strategies and social vigilantism on public responses.Public Relations Review, 43(3), 587-596.

[4] Trayner, G. (2017). Why values matter–how public relations professionals can draw on moral foundations theory. Public Relations Review, 43(1), 123-129.

             

Fairouz Kasri is a Persuasive Communication Master’s Student at the University of Amsterdam.She plays various roles in the management of projects at SWOCC, the Dutch Foundation for Fundamental Research on Brands and Brand Communication. She’s passionate about ABBA, politics, pop-culture, women’s rights, and youth leadership development.