Purpose This paper aims to contribute to the emerging body of research on firestorms, specifically on the inflammatory user-generated content (UGC) created in response to brand transgressions. By analyzing and segmenting UGC created and shared in the wake of three different events, the authors identify which type of inflammatory message is most likely to be widely shared; thus, contributing to a possible online firestorm. Design/methodology/approach Tweets were collected involving brand transgressions in the retail, fast food and technology space from varying timeframe and diverse media coverage. Then, the tweets were coded for message intention and analyzed with linguistics software to determine the message characteristics and framing. A two-step cluster analysis identified three types of UGC. Findings The authors found that message dimensions and the framing of tweets in the context of brand transgressions differed in characteristics, sentiment, call to action and the extent to which the messages were shared. The findings contradict traditional negative word-of-mouth studies involving idiosyncratic service and product failure. During online brand firestorms, rational activism messages with a call to action, generated in response to a firm’s transgression or “sparks,” have a higher likelihood of being shared (virality). Originality/value This research provides novel insights into UGC created after brand transgressions. Different types of messages created after these events vary in the extent that they “fan the flames” of the transgression. A message typology and flowchart are provided to assist managers in identifying and responding to three message types: ash, sparks and embers.

The authors examine consumer activism as a form of power used by individuals when they experience a perceived failure with organizational service performance. Consumer citizens demonstrate the power of their voices through digital vigilantism consisting of injurious and constructive digital content sharing. The authors use agency theory and power concepts to study an instance in which a public service provider breached consumer performance expectations. They study digital responses to the 2017 Charlottesville Unite the Right rally because an independent review found the public service providers culpable. Tweets (n = 73,649) were analyzed utilizing qualitative thematic coding, cluster analysis, and sentiment analysis. Consumer conversations (tweets) during and after the rally yielded five types of digital vigilantism characterized by the following consumer voice clusters: “Shame on them!”, “Hear ye, hear ye…”, “Can you believe this?”, “Let’s get ‘em!”, and “Do the right thing.” The authors also present a new facet of digital vigilantism represented by the pessimistic and optimistic power of consumer voice. Several proactive and reactive responses are presented for policy and practice when responding to digital vigilantism.

No abstract