The challenge that Whole Foods is facing is an example; social media became a big part of this issue. Thanks to blogs, Twitter, Facebook and other tools, more people learned about the letter and could weigh in, making their opinions known.

Should the CEO of Whole Foods NOT have written the letter to the editor because it could create a backlash, especially online, even though this was how he felt? Is the personal opinion of the CEO inextricably tied to the brand? Does “authentic” mean different things to different people and would keeping his opinion to himself, because of the risk to the brand, mean that the CEO isn’t authentic?

On my Facebook page, I have a combination of friends, family, clients and colleagues. I tend to be pretty positive about my updates and blend work and personal information. My “personal” brand is based on several things, including a positive attitude, can do it approach and seeing the world in terms of solutions rather than problems. Now, I am very human and there are days when I am stressed, frustrated or just plain cranky. I don’t tend to update my Facebook page on those days. Not to protect my brand, but because I don’t think posting an update that is inspired by my cranky pants has any value to the people I connect with on Facebook.

I have had one former colleague comment on the fact that I am normally pretty positive and happy (and I am not sure whether her comment was meant to be taken as a observation, a compliment or a criticism…). Her comment and the question of brand or social media first has made me think about this. Am I violating the code of social media but not sharing “everything?” I don’t think so. I don’t believe the people that read this blog, follow AHApr on Twitter, or are on my Facebook page need, want or care to know every little thing that goes through my mind.

I have also seen some pretty interesting behaviour from people that call themselves social media experts. Rushing to judgment, hurtful posts that are more malicious and personal than constructive criticism. I have seen bullying and mean-spiritedness, all in the name of “authenticity.” 

The rules of social media are about what works for you, your organization and the communities that you want to connect with. They aren’t one-size-fits-all and I think that it’s important to see the value in each of us finding out how it works in our little piece of this world.

I think that social media provides an opportunity to connect and be a part of a conversation, but you have to be strategic about it and you need to engage and provide value. Sometimes that comes from knowing when you don’t have anything to contribute.

There has been a huge backlash to Mackey’s letter to the editor in the Wall Street Journal. There is now a movement to boycott Whole Foods – there is a Facebook page and you can follow the boycott on Twitter.

Whole Foods has a forum section on its website where the discussion is quite heated. Braud says that the Whole Foods’ media relations team have been working to distance the company from the opinion, explaining that Mackey wrote the letter as a private citizen. However, as Braud points out, the letter uses the Whole Foods health care plan as an example and Mackey clearly points out that he is the CEO of Whole Foods throughout his opinion letter.

Mackey is entitled to his opinion. However, publishing that opinion in the Wall Street Journal might not have been the best use of his profile. He uses hot button words (such as socialism) when describing Obama’s Health Care Reform approach and he is a person with some very strong opinions. In writing, his words may come across harsher than perhaps he intended. People are angry about what he had to say and they are coming together to show Whole Foods that they are upset. Social media provides the opportunity for people who disagree with what Mackey says to stand up and say so, to criticize his take on health care and to say their piece. Years ago, the only opportunity they would have would be to write their own letter to the editor in response and to, maybe, plan some local protests. Now it’s a national issue. The people that are angry about his comments can find one another and leverage their ability to get attention through social media.

Social media has empowered the people that might not have had the ability to have their opinions published in the Wall Street Journal. This is a good example of how an issue or crisis can become very big very quickly because of social media.

The Whole Foods’ communications team has a challenge on their hands. They have a CEO with strong opinions and they have a larger—and growing—consumer base that is angry and threatening to spend their money elsewhere. It will be interesting to see what might happen over the next few days or weeks.

What would you do? Have you ever heard your CEO put forward an opinion that worried you? What if he or she made that opinion public in a letter to the editor and there was a consumer backlash that social media played a role in…what would you do?