Last week I was called by a Florida Times-Union reporter about a 'Sucks' web site story. It's something we're used to seeing by now, person feels slighted, creates web site, generates negative publicity for organization. The article was published over the weekend.
Reading over the article you'll find that the target of one man's ire is the Shands Healthcare system. What does Shands have to say?
A Shands vice president, Steven Blumberg, declined to comment for the story.And they wonder why they have a problem? I can understand if there are legal issues involved, but refusing comment in an article like that only re-enforces the notion that Shands doesn't want to help/deal with customers.
Visitor Comments
This quote from the story is just so rich with insight and perspective:
"The barrier to entry for writing what you want to write about ... is certainly low on the Internet."
I mean really, bravo Mike...bravo.
Posted by: Mike Manuel | December 4, 2006 5:46 PM
Thank you for covering this, and thank you for pointing out how Shands is demonstrating the problem.
In my experience, however, is that higher profile bloggers and mainstream media are highly unlikely to offer such support. Criticism is "partisan", while bloggers as well as reporters want to remain "neutral" to enhance their own credibility. And their own disinclination to help out actually assists in the suppression. I belong to a pretty substantial network of critics, but there's not what we can do about an organization that has the resources to pay people like you so they can own Google.
As we speak, a bunch of bloggers who have carefully honed their credibility by refusing to help critics are meeting in Washington to offer organizations further advice on what to "do about" people like me. How do I know this is a suck up conference? I don't see any strong critic bloggers on the panels.
If anyone would like to help the underdog, here's my link: http://corphq.livejournal.com
Posted by: gadfly | December 11, 2006 3:23 PM
I don't blame shands for not responding. The originators of these sites want money from the targeted corporations in order to shut them up. They're in it for the money, let's be real. I have been a patient at shands and they were great when a problem arose and my family contacted administration. We got a personal meeting with a patient representative who brought our concerns to senior administration and they were responsive.
Posted by: Faye K. | March 30, 2007 9:50 PM
I had a transplant at Shands in Gainesville and my mother in law was treated for a stroke at Shands in Jacksonville last year. They save thousands of lives. One or two loud unhappy people do not a pervasive problem make. What about the rest of us success stories?
Posted by: Glen Walsh | March 30, 2007 9:52 PM
Just because someone is bitter about Shands does not mean that everyone had bad experience.
I know i did not. Every time I had to go there I get best service. And that is because I give them some positive attitude and that is what I get back.
Although my worst experiences were at Memorial hospital...but, oh wait, there is no Memorialsuck web page where I should go to express how bitter I am about them..
And for the people who don't like Shands, please don't go there, this will give nursing staff more time and space to attend the other patients who really need medical attention.
God bless!
Posted by: Maya | February 5, 2009 11:32 PM