The answer is in your opening sentence. Target is loved; Wal-Mart is hated. Social media exist in the real world, where Target's reputation is better than Wal-Mart's, based on opinions formed before social media came on the scene.

Good points. Maybe we can equate this situation to the political arena. The world loves to hate the U.S. Maybe because it's big and successful and when it makes mistakes, they're doozies.

On the other hand, Great Britain and Canada always seem to be well-liked, even though they make plenty of mistakes. They're just smaller and their missteps aren't as publicized in the world press.

A stretch? You tell me.

I agree with Nathan.

When you don't like a person or brand you look for any excuse to smear them. When you like a person or brand you intentionally overlook their mistakes.

Here's a thought: Maybe getting involved in social media and being "completely transparent" isn't as important as providing great service and great products.

Wal-mart wasn't being smeared simply because they goofed up with their blogs. They were smeared because they don't provide great service plus many other short comings.

Great observation Michael -- "Wal-mart wasn't being smeared simply because they goofed up with their blogs. They were smeared because they don't provide great service plus many other short comings."

Kaye also brings up a good point on her blog (link from Josh above). She sounds a note of caution for any and all companies to be careful who you trust your social media strategy to when she writes, "“…agencies are selling themselves as social media experts & then they go in not having a clue how to operate in these spaces! Buyer beware, I guess.”

It's the "credit in the bank" theory. Target has more credit with folks because of their overall commitment to service, selection, innovation, cleanliness, etc. They are allowed more leeway to make an occasional misstep. Because, well, they've earned it. At least in my book.

This post reminded me how _Target_ survived from last year's Christmas season with the Salvation Army bell ringers. Target was drawing parallels to Scrooge, but it didn't last long.

Plenty of good commentary. I think it really boils down to what Nathan said, there is little difference between online and offline reps.

Plenty of 'great' companies have weathered severe issues, but what got them through it was the reputation they had built up.

This faux pas by Target pales considerably in comparison to some real damage that Wal Mart has done through their underhanded business practices that force small businesses to close, their suppliers to barely scrape by, and their employees to rely on welfare. Not even close to a double standard.

A Facebook faux pas isn't in the same league as what WalMart has been villified for. What the social media management company they hired did wasn't right.

More importantly, it wasn't the sort of decision that affects the economy or people's daily lives in a big way. WalMart's bad reputation is from the lengths they go to for driving prices down, their poor treatment of employees--not social media.

Is that Rick Murray, the same Rick Murray with edelman PR firm? Wasn't Edelman the PR firm behind the series of curious blogging efforts on behalf of Wal-mart?

I completely understand why people are upset with Walmart over the way they treat their employees (my sister and niece both worked there) and the dirty tricks they have played with local governments in their attempt to avoid social responsibility and taxes. But I think this goes deeper. I think this is has a lot to do with class. I think it's easy for my friends and other people like them to put Walmart down because they are perceived as catering to a poorer, less educated, consumption crazy audience. However, what I want to know is when they sit down to sip a latte while shopping online, do they check the credentials, business practices and employment policies of the companies they buy from? In my experience, I only have two friends out of about 40 that walk the talk and check what they buy from online and brick and mortar stores for social responsibility and sustainability. Everyone else I know shops ANYWHERE BUT WALMART and has no idea what the polices are of the stores that they patronize. Why? Because they heard a story on TV about Walmart pulling tricks. But another reason is class. They find it easy to sneer at them and say "I would never shop there" as a way to make themselves better than the 'white trash' that goes to Walmart. I don't think the media is above that same division. And they will go online and buy the same digital camera from someone who could be running a warehouse full of under-paid, poorly treated employees. But as long as none of their friends see them with a Walmart bag, it's all good.

I agree with Cindy regarding class. Target is an upper middleclass haven. The prices are reasonable, almost as low as Walmart's, in fact. However, Target does not stoop to marketing themselves as "cheap." Walmart's cheesy smiley face, "watch for falling prices" slogan and dated patriotic color scheme fails to resonate with soccer moms, corporate dads and glitter-crazy teeny boppers. Upper middleclassers are able to grab “a starbucks” and strut through the modern, colorful Target displays, saving much like they would at the grimier Walmart.

The difference, too, might lie in Target’s workforce, which tends to be college-bound teens. Most Target cashiers wouldn't be caught dead working the fryer at McDonalds, much less...gasp...wearing a blue vest with a smiley face button. And while they may not admit it, what upper middleclasser wouldn’t prefer the ambitious high school student to the welfare mom at the checkout?

Maybe Target has evaded the negative attention because on the surface it appeals to upper middleclass ideals: education, social liberalism and fiscal conservatism. And the money you save? Well, that’s perfect for keeping up with Joneses.

I am in agreement with both Chelsey and Cindy. I myself shop frequently at both Wal-Mart and Target.

I can remember fond memories of standing in the books and magazine section reading the teeny bopper magazines while my mom shopped for groceries and household goods. I also remember that the staff at that local Wal-Mart were friendly, efficient and knowledgeable about the store's layout and products. My mother never complained and even said it was better than the other grocery and household goods stores in the area.

It wasn't until late into my teens that both of us noted the deterioration of service when shopping at Wal-Mart. We assumed it was just our area but found it to be the same way in many other areas.

I think over time as Wal-Mart has tried its damnedest to bring the cheapest prices to it's comsumers that they've essentially forgotten or don't care about the initial reason they first opened. To provide quality low priced products with a smile. That cheesy smile on those buttons and POS stands doesn't so much exemplify low prices so much as it personifies the type of service that we're supposed to be receiving when purchasing the low priced quality products.

In their quest to be the biggest bad@@s supercenter globally, they've focused more on cheap labor which sometimes translates into uneducated labor along with cheap prices. Which if I remember correctly when speaking to some store managers, means those customer service associates don't really receive thorough training on providing product knowledge when asked a question by a consumer either.

Now, it's really more about checking people out and stocking their gazillion store items versus providing above average knowledge of the store and it's products.

Not all Wal-Mart stores are full of dumb, bad or poor people, they're full of untrained customer service associates who don't care not because they want to be that way but because no one has trained them to care.

Target however exemplifies the starry eyed teen who has more hopes and dreams than that pregnant teen mom at Wal-Mart or the old foreign guy from Pakistan that you can barely understand. Their stores certainly are brighter and less of a warehouse than Wal-Mart and they provide just enough items that fit that Wal-Mart budget but are super trendy at the same time and fill that need of I can't shop at the mall but I can look like I did attidue.

And let's face it, Target has done a fantastic job of positioning their stores in upper middle class suburbs while intentionally avoiding those areas that are demographically rife with poor, minority, or low income individuals/families.

My town recently had a Target go up on the outskirts of the area because of the sudden influx of upper middle class and upper class families from the city even though our local Wal-Mart has been there for 18 years. Before that, Target didn't care that our area was actually growing in size within itself and perhaps they could benefit from providing some healthy competition to the clientele.

The fact of the matter is, they saw dollars, bigger and better dollars, rolling into the area and got on the gravy train. Even though, from the looks of the place whenever I shop there, the majority of people buying are locals who have been in my area since birth.

The bottom line for me is people may have discriminated against Wal-Mart in the past based on looks, i.e, store layout, lighting, diverse employee base, but now, people discriminate against Wal-Mart because their service in short sucks and the types of people they hire (to keep everything so cheap) are sometimes not the prettiest, brightest or most easily understood people to deal with.

I could say that I'm going to rebel against the "Rat King" but then I wouldn't have that extra two dollars to spend at Starbucks whenever I shop at Target and show the world externally that I'm about peace, love and money.

I am in agreement with both Chelsey and Cindy. I myself shop frequently at both Wal-Mart and Target.

I can remember fond memories of standing in the books and magazine section reading the teeny bopper magazines while my mom shopped for groceries and household goods. I also remember that the staff at that local Wal-Mart were friendly, efficient and knowledgeable about the store's layout and products. My mother never complained and even said it was better than the other grocery and household goods stores in the area.

It wasn't until late into my teens that both of us noted the deterioration of service when shopping at Wal-Mart. We assumed it was just our area but found it to be the same way in many other areas.

I think over time as Wal-Mart has tried its damnedest to bring the cheapest prices to it's comsumers that they've essentially forgotten or don't care about the initial reason they first opened. To provide quality low priced products with a smile. That cheesy smile on those buttons and POS stands doesn't so much exemplify low prices so much as it personifies the type of service that we're supposed to be receiving when purchasing the low priced quality products.

In their quest to be the biggest bad@@s supercenter globally, they've focused more on cheap labor which sometimes translates into uneducated labor along with cheap prices. Which if I remember correctly when speaking to some store managers, means those customer service associates don't really receive thorough training on providing product knowledge when asked a question by a consumer either.

Now, it's really more about checking people out and stocking their gazillion store items versus providing above average knowledge of the store and it's products.

Not all Wal-Mart stores are full of dumb, bad or poor people, they're full of untrained customer service associates who don't care not because they want to be that way but because no one has trained them to care.

Target however exemplifies the starry eyed teen who has more hopes and dreams than that pregnant teen mom at Wal-Mart or the old foreign guy from Pakistan that you can barely understand. Their stores certainly are brighter and less of a warehouse than Wal-Mart and they provide just enough items that fit that Wal-Mart budget but are super trendy at the same time and fill that need of I can't shop at the mall but I can look like I did attitude.

And let's face it, Target has done a fantastic job of positioning their stores in upper middle class suburbs while intentionally avoiding those areas that are demographically rife with poor, minority, or low income individuals/families.

My town recently had a Target go up on the outskirts of the area because of the sudden influx of upper middle class and upper class families from the city even though our local Wal-Mart has been there for 18 years. Before that, Target didn't care that our area was actually growing in size within itself and perhaps they could benefit from providing some healthy competition to the clientele.

The fact of the matter is, they saw dollars, bigger and better dollars, rolling into the area and got on the gravy train. Even though, from the looks of the place whenever I shop there, the majority of people buying are locals who have been in my area since birth.

The bottom line for me is people may have discriminated against Wal-Mart in the past based on looks, i.e, store layout, lighting, diverse employee base, but now, people discriminate against Wal-Mart because their service in short sucks and the types of people they hire (to keep everything so cheap) are sometimes not the prettiest, brightest or most easily understood people to deal with.

I could say that I'm going to rebel against the "Rat King" but then I wouldn't have that extra two dollars to spend at Starbucks whenever I shop at Target and show the world externally that I'm about peace, love and money.