Most people tend to agree that Web 2.0 implies a feedback loop between companies and customers. Dialogue has never been a big feature of corporate communications. Generally they’re happier issuing sales-speak then engaging in criticism of their businesses. But more and more corporations are heading out into the cyber-arena, determined to open the dialogue up with their customers. But what happens when the customers tell you suck? What then?

Netscape has been an example of the criticism this month. The new Calacanis-inspired Web 2.0 Netscape drew heavy criticism from their old users. Effectively, the complaints were allowed to stand, but utterly ignored. Obviously Netscape planned on changing the page, and has no intention of changing it back. Okay, we seem to have a counter-intuitive problem brewing.

If you encourage interactivity at your website, and allow customer comments, and the comments are largely negative towards YOU, do you have an obligation to listen to your visitors and respond to their complaints. I think you do. Whether you want to hear what they’re saying, they’re the very people who make up the lifeblood of the website. If my only regular visitor, Gomer, started complaining, you better believe I’d modify my behavior! It’s lonely talking to yourself at a blog.

The whole Netscape issue is interesting to me. I sort of applaud them for being brave and directing the website into future, but the other part of me thinks pissing off the regulars is certainly a dumbass move, especially when you consider that many of them were probably people that AOL paid a ton to acquire as customers.

If Web 2.0 interactivity only means getting users to click and view pages, and not really listening to what they’re saying, it won’t live up to its’ promise. As more and more of these type of sites launch, we’ll need to keep an eye on how they handle the feedback, and what becomes of the ones who ignore it.