6 ms·
It sounds like Marriott wanted to be in a position to say someone had been fired, and he was offered up. Either way, pretty shitty on Marriott's part.
by wdr1 9y ago
It sounds like Marriott wanted to be in a position to say someone had been fired, and he was offered up.
Either way, pretty shitty on Marriott's part.
- snarfy 9y agoIt should have been the guy that allowed all low level employees access to the official Marriott twitter account.
- __david__ 9y agoOr maybe not fire anyone and just ignore silly twitter temper tantrums.
- ptaipale 9y agoI understand that this was not just a twitter tantrum, but a major disruption of business: inability to book online in China, in fact causing huge losses.
- tyingq 9y agoSurely they are using some overlay tool (tweetdeck, etc) instead of direct Twitter access. The tool should have limited or used some approval process for "likes" if that was viewed as risky.
- ddeck 9y ago>It should have been the guy that allowed all low level employees access to the official Marriott twitter account Where in the article did it say that all low-level employees have access to the official Twitter account? The employee in question had access because it was literally his job to reply to customers on their official Twitter account: The Marriott customer care manager intended to spend his eight-hour overnight shift doing what he always did: helping hundreds of Marriott customers around the world as they shot complaints, questions and reward-point requests to the hotel chain’s official Twitter accounts