In social media, marketers attempt to influence consumers by using directive language, that is, expressions designed to get consumers to take action. While the literature has shown that directive messages in advertising have mixed results for recipients, we know little about the effects of directive brand language on consumers who see brands interacting with other consumers in social media conversations. On the basis of a field study and three online experiments, this study shows that directive language in brand conversation has a detrimental downstream effect on engagement of consumers who observe such exchanges. Specifically, in line with Goffman's facework theory, because a brand that encourages consumers to react could be perceived as face-threatening, consumers who see a brand interacting with others in a directive way may feel vicarious embarrassment and engage less (compared with a conversation without directive language). In addition, we find that when the conversation is nonproduct-centered (vs. product-centered), consumers expect more freedom, as in mundane conversations, even for others; therefore, directive language has a stronger negative effect. However, in this context, the strength of the brand relationship mitigates this effect. Thus, this study contributes to the literature on directive language and brand-consumer interactions by highlighting the importance of context in interactive communication, with direct relevance for social media and brand management.