Should TOCs abandon social media sites as a means to communicate with customers regarding disruption/service updates?

[jagardner1984]

Given the number of methods by which buying a ticket now involves data collection - and how interconnected most customer services platforms are - I’d think hitting reply to your confirmation text or email, or logging in to whatever platform you bought the tickets on, or were browsing tickets if it’s a presale enquiry, should surely connect you to customer service staff altogether more directly than trying via yet another platform to identify your request and narrow down who should reply.

For example, if I have a query regarding my octopus energy bill, I hit reply and a human gets back to me, normally very quickly.

Personally I am not really sure why the billionaire information distorters have much to do with governments disseminating real information, or with public transport providers supplying people with info on the 1842 to Reading.

 

[JohnMcL7]

It's probably to best to choose a platform that is not declining. I wouldn't recommend MySpace for example.

Also one that doesn't require a login to view all the data on it either and has had some extremely questionable behaviour.

 

[Nym]

Also one that doesn't require a login to view all the data on it either and has had some extremely questionable behaviour.

Quite.

If a company is choosing somewhere to platform the information about their service, it needs to have the same barriers to entry as the use of their services. ie. None.

 

[GoneSouth]

It's probably to best to choose a platform that is not declining. I wouldn't recommend MySpace for example.

Here’s a novelty, use the train operator’s own website instead of making people sign up to one of these disgusting social media giants.

Why should anyone have to sign up to a morally bankrupt organisation just to find out their train information. The train operators need to get off their lazy backsides and do it properly. Hopefully a reasonable attempt to do this will be made by GBR

 

[Alex-B]

Here’s a novelty, use the train operator’s own website instead of making people sign up to one of these disgusting social media giants.

Why should anyone have to sign up to a morally bankrupt organisation just to find out their train information. The train operators need to get off their lazy backsides and do it properly. Hopefully a reasonable attempt to do this will be made by GBR

You mean like the email address, phone number, and web contact forms all listed on Lumo's website?

Every passenger TOC has their phone numbers and other web contact details listed at https://www.nationalrail.co.uk/travel-information/find-a-train-company/

 

[Tetchytyke]

You mean like the email address, phone number, and web contact forms all listed on Lumo's website?

My experience with TOCs is that sending an email is shouting into the void, but private messages on social media sites get responded to very quickly.

 

[The exile]

The operators should be prepared to use all platforms that customers do. Clearly there is an issue with adoption of new platforms- but while people continue to use existing ones then so should the train company. Once traffic on a particular platform drops below a certain threshold I would have no problem with a message that said something like “although this platform continues to be monitored, due to low volumes this is no longer continuous. For a faster response, please use… “

 

[AlterEgo]

Twitter made a lot of sense when it was the king of social media, but it is no longer. TOCs should take a leaf out of the Eastern world and use WhatsApp a lot more, in my view.

 

[Djgr]

Presumably channels used have to be consistent with the operator's CSR strategy?

 

[Nym]

Twitter made a lot of sense when it was the king of social media, but it is no longer. TOCs should take a leaf out of the Eastern world and use WhatsApp a lot more, in my view.

So rely on Meta instead of X then?

What is wrong with publishing their updates to their own website and having a contact email / form?

 

[najaB]

Personally I am not really sure why the billionaire information distorters have much to do with governments disseminating real information, or with public transport providers supplying people with info on the 1842 to Reading.

Data gathering/misinformation issues aside, the main reason is convenience. The big social media platforms act as a hub - assuming you have an account with, say, Facebook then it's relatively easy to find the TOC that you're dealing with, and communicate with the TOC in a standardised manner via a post, rather than each TOC's website and form, which may not have the same UX/UI patterns. It also makes it easier to deal with issues that cross TOC boundaries by tagging both of them in your post. And, lastly, public posts put impetus on the TOC to deal with the matter more quickly.

*UX - user experience, UI - user interface.

 

[AlterEgo]

So rely on Meta instead of X then?

What is wrong with publishing their updates to their own website and having a contact email / form?

Nothing. TOCs do this already. But that isn't live chat and it's not a platform most readily trust. WhatsApp has mainstream use, far more than any other online platform in the UK.

 

[W-on-Sea]

The public interface of social media channels certainly helps to persuade companies to act as they should in customers' interest more quickly than does more purely private means of communication.

Maybe X/Twitter is not as overwhelmingly dominant among social media channels as it once was, but I don't see anything that can seriously be said to have replaced it as a channel of popular information with similar reach. Really public transport operators should be on there, and engaging with their customers on there.

Nice if they are one Whatsapp too, but that's a plus, not a replacement

 

[WelshBluebird]

In terms of the fact X / Twitter is less prominent now its worth being clear companies and organisations using these platforms for customer service do not use the websites / appa directly - its all integrated into one customer service platform that connects to a variety of channels. The person from GWR talking to you on WhatsApp is likely using the same software to reply to someone on X too.

Based on that I don't think it makes much sense to drop support for a platform unless theres a real significant financial reason, or the customer service platform itself or social media platform is dropping support for it to be used in that way.

Certainly something like X gives you two real benefits:

1. A near real time reply. Expecially useful when you are actually travelling.
2. A very public view. Which can sometimes result in a better customer outcome than what otherwise would have happened. This is why a lot of the time you get asked to DM them instead (sometimes it isnt, its for genuine data protection reasons, but other times its absolutely to save face).

Whilst some platforms like WhatsApp can give you the real time part, not many options give you both that and the public nature of it.

 

[JohnMcL7]

Certainly something like X gives you two real benefits:

1. A near real time reply. Expecially useful when you are actually travelling.
2. A very public view. Which can sometimes result in a better customer outcome than what otherwise would have happened. This is why a lot of the time you get asked to DM them instead (sometimes it isnt, its for genuine data protection reasons, but other times its absolutely to save face).

The problem with Twitter is the exact opposite of number 2, Musk decided to restrict heavily restrict access to the site if you don't have an account - that reason alone should be a sufficient reason to stop or limit using it for public information since it's no longer public. And that's way before we get onto the problems with bots, questionable advertisers and worse with the platform.

 

[JamesT]

The problem with Twitter is the exact opposite of number 2, Musk decided to restrict heavily restrict access to the site if you don't have an account - that reason alone should be a sufficient reason to stop or limit using it for public information since it's no longer public. And that's way before we get onto the problems with bots, questionable advertisers and worse with the platform.

But there’s very little barrier to getting an account on X. And you can still see some bits of X without an account, WhatsApp is entirely unusable without one. You also have to hand over your phone number if you want an account. X you could use a burner email if you didn’t want it associated with your main email.

 

[JohnMcL7]

But there’s very little barrier to getting an account on X. And you can still see some bits of X without an account, WhatsApp is entirely unusable without one. You also have to hand over your phone number if you want an account. X you could use a burner email if you didn’t want it associated with your main email.

It's still a barrier and you can see very little without an account, I don't want an account on a site with extremely questionable practices and a highly erratic owner. It's not a public site as was being claimed as a positive aspect of the site.

I'm not recommending whatsapp either, I'm with the posts above that public companies should be moving away from relying on private social media sites they have no control over and moving to something independent. Elon Musk is the most prominent example of why these sites shouldn't be used but I certainly don't think Zuckerberg or similar is much better.

 

[JamesT]

It's still a barrier and you can see very little without an account, I don't want an account on a site with extremely questionable practices and a highly erratic owner. It's not a public site as was being claimed as a positive aspect of the site.

I'm not recommending whatsapp either, I'm with the posts above that public companies should be moving away from relying on private social media sites they have no control over and moving to something independent. Elon Musk is the most prominent example of why these sites shouldn't be used but I certainly don't think Zuckerberg or similar is much better.

If you want something independent, essentially it's going to be the Fediverse, of which Mastodon is the most well known instance. But compared to all the well known systems, nobody uses it.
It's chicken and egg, no company is going to give up on a site that reaches 45% of UK internet users until there's a viable alternative. But people won't seek out those alternatives without something compelling on them.

 

[Nym]

If you want something independent, essentially it's going to be the Fediverse, of which Mastodon is the most well known instance. But compared to all the well known systems, nobody uses it.
It's chicken and egg, no company is going to give up on a site that reaches 45% of UK internet users until there's a viable alternative. But people won't seek out those alternatives without something compelling on them.

But why use anything but your own website that reaches 100% of users

 

[JamesT]

But why use anything but your own website that reaches 100% of users

As others have said, you’re much more visible on social media. Your content may come up in people’s feeds without them having to search whereas you’d have to deliberately search out a company website. Also the more interactive elements that are a fundamental part of social media.

 

[Farigiraf]

The GBR website is likely to help with this - if you have an account there (which you probably will, if using the railways often) then you could access customer service for any non-OAO service. Doesn't give the promptness and publicity of a social media platform but could help to solve minor things. A live chat option that is regularly manned by real people (who know about railway rules) is a good first step.

On the other hand, if rail operators are going to move away from Twitter/X (as they should) now that it's not usable without registering an account, then I can think of one social media site, that's centred around the UK railway, which is easy to use and doesn't do dodgy things with your data. Maybe the Disputes & Prosecutions page could be reworked to a general urgent advice forum

 

[najaB]

But why use anything but your own website that reaches 100% of users

Because websites are fragmented. I won't see anything on CrossCountry's website unless I specifically go there to look for it, whereas social media sites are built around a feed.

 

[oic]

I’m glad this thread exists because the last discussion dates back to 2022.
Twitter was a very good avenue for dissemination of information because disruption could be posted about, others could reply to it, and the response was public so if it applied to you, you could act upon it.

This meant disruption info was shared outwards, impacted people could share info inwards and it was visible. The details were there for others to benefit from and the initial “disruption post” didn’t need to be war and peace or overly detailed.

RSS feeds, whatsapp, Facebook etc. don’t have that bidirectional flow of info, the critical mass of users or the information detail balance. It’s a real pain.

Mastodon/bluesky in theory could do it, but it is a bit like going back to the days of Twitter where there were 1 million users and the global feed was shown on the homepage.

 

[WelshBluebird]

In terms of websites - the issue there is they are one way. They can give out information but I can't ask. Thats the bit social media platforms give you. Yeah technically you could have a custom built platform but why invent something that already exists?

 

[JohnMcL7]

In terms of websites - the issue there is they are one way. They can give out information but I can't ask. Thats the bit social media platforms give you. Yeah technically you could have a custom built platform but why invent something that already exists?

That is absolutely not true, you can easily have functions on websites where you can interact with staff and there are many sites like this. For visibility there's also nothing stopping companies from automatically copying the data from their website to any social media site they want.

Why invent something that already exists - because as keeps getting pointed out in this thread, there are many problems with the existing solutions. You have no control over the site you're using, the content being posted and you're completely at their mercy which Musk has demonstrated extremely well, he's almost completely removed public access to the site, completely gutted the safety and moderation teams allowing illegal material to proliferate on the site (in some cases encouraged by him) and also destroyed the verification system which led to many companies being impersonated and users not knowing which the genuine ones were. I'm genuinely surprised how many public organisations and companies still use Twitter despite this and to be honest more surprised how ok people here are with all that as well.

Yes it's a cheap and easy way out for companies not to bother implementing these functions themselves but it's been made very clear, they need to be moving away from these large social media companies.

I am disappointed Mastodon didn't really take off because it is much more like e-mail and largely independent of everyone else so it would be possible for a company (or under the government all train companies) to have all the features people want from the likes of Twitter without being under the control powerful US billionaires.

 

[AlterEgo]

Mastodon didn't take off because it is difficult for the average person to understand and it was the original receptacle for the first tranche of hall monitor types who left Twitter.

 

[Dave W]

My side hustle is in social media (non league football) and while we acknowledge the fact we are contributing to the hellscape, we simply can't throw away over 7000 followers (of admittedly varying quality) - Twitter/X still remains the key place to do non league engagement. I wonder if the same thought applies with some companies here, whereby they feel they can't abandon a big customer base like this.

I disagree massively with the idea that the website would reach 100% of your audience, by the way. I couldn't tell you the last time I used a TOC's website. I use third party ticketing, RTT/Citymapper and Twitter to buy my ticket and make sure my train is running. The last place I'd check is the TOC website, and I can't be the only one.

Yes it's a cheap and easy way out for companies not to bother implementing these functions themselves but it's been made very clear, they need to be moving away from these large social media companies.

By who? Is there an agreed strategy for that? I think you're confusing "easy way out" with "best option" - you may not like it, but X remains a very well used system and the engagement companies of all kinds get on there proves it, even if it isn't quite what it was (the glory days of Twitter were pre 2010, by the way).

So, back to my day job in tech... let's be practical... What would a TOC need to implement to bin all social media:

• A chat facility
• A near-live and public response system which mimics a social media feed
• A user account system which stops the feed becoming a free for all
• An alert system which quickly shows disruption on a train by train basis
• A marketing budget to promote this

I can tell you for free that these aren't just things you switch on behind the scenes.

 

[cb a1]

I refuse to use Twitter / X anymore. It was useful, but I cannot use a site where the person who owns it is using it to promote far right ideology irrespective of the inconvenience it causes me.

Personally, I use the TOC websites / apps, and staff. I've also discovered an added bonus. Disconnecting from the 'must know what is happening 24/7' makes travel far less stressful for me*. *I fully appreciate that is not the same for everyone*.

 

[najaB]

I refuse to use Twitter / X anymore. It was useful, but I cannot use a site where the person who owns it is using it to promote far right ideology irrespective of the inconvenience it causes me.

I also avoid using Twitter, but still have an account and will log in if I need to contact a company. It gives me a little bit of satisfaction that the few times I do use it cost him money, and he doesn't get to show me tons of adverts to make any money off me.

 

[cb a1]

I also avoid using Twitter, but still have an account and will log in if I need to contact a company. It gives me a little bit of satisfaction that the few times I do use it cost him money, and he doesn't get to show me tons of adverts to make any money off me.

How does it cost him money? Apologies if this is OT, but I've long subscribed to the aphorism that 'if it's free, you are the product', so interested in your take on this.