Yeah, me neither. Rewarder describes itself as simply a social marketplace that connects people who are looking for “unique knowledge or expertise” with those who are interested in helping them.
Did you catch that? It’s difficult to understand what the website is at first glance. But nonetheless, it’s the most recent social media site that is eager to make a name for itself.
Rewarder held a media tweet chat this week to engage audiences through Twitter. Tweeters had the opportunity to participate in a Tweetchat with Rewarder and to learn more about the company. The overwhelming responses of people thought that Rewarder’s concept and website were difficult to follow. This should issue a major red flag to anyone who knows that your customers are always right.
Rewarder took the initiative to explain that all consumers have to do is read its “About” and “FAQ” section to get the point of the site. Well, that’s easier said than done. The consumer must also create a profile first before reviewing rewards on the site. Not to mention, once you create an account it automatically links itself to your Facebook account and uses your private information.
Upon visiting the website the layout looks similar to Pinterest and Etsy. From a consumer point of view, the site is complicated and it shouldn’t take them more than a few seconds to determine what the site is about. The consumer has to dig through the site just to find out what it is about and how it works.
My suggestions for Rewarder are to tweak a few things on their website and clearly explain what the benefits to using the site. The website needs to be more user friendly and should have more information on the top of the homepage where everyone can see it. Secondly, simplify what the uses are, because if the consumer can’t understand it then they won’t be interested.
How do you think Rewarder can improve its website and marketability?
Have you figured it out? Thirteen-year-old Trayvon Martin purchased both of these items shortly before he died in a shooting walking home outside of an apartment.
Skittles and Arizona Iced Tea got caught up in the scandal because they did nothing about the matter. They were criticized for how they handled the matter. In the light of the situation, both brands released statements explaining that they were saddened by the incident and offered their condolences.
The public has said that Skittles and Arizona should donate a share of their profits to Martin’s family or create a scholarship fund under his name. Neither of them gave their profits away, but instead promoted the Million Hoodie March and told the nation to, “Send bags of Skittles to the Sanford Chief of Police, demanding that George Zimmerman be brought to justice.”
People shamed both brands for how they behaved, and shared their opinions about the incident using social media via Twitter. They were upset because they were profiting from the situation and yet doing nothing about it. Skittles and Arizona explained that it would be “inappropriate” for them to get “involved.” Here’s the thing, they were already involved.
Public relations wise, I think that both brands should have done more or at least said more. I understand that they didn’t want to get involved because it was a national case and were afraid it would affect their sales, but show some sympathy. This was an unarmed kid who was killed. Skittles and Arizona must have known that the nation was outraged with the way they were behaving yet did nothing. The public’s opinion of them was unfavorable, but people continued buying their products to support Martin. The brands gained from this case; the least they could do is give to his family. If not them, then a scholarship fund under his name. Both of them should have showed some kind of compassion.
What do you think? Should Skittles and Arizona been more proactive on helping Martin’s family?